|
Who What Now posted:Oh, you think you're being abused and oppressed? Are you going to cry yourself to sleep tonight? Are you going to go through your day tomorrow afraid that someone from this thread is going to physically assault you unawares? Are you going to give up on exercising some of your rights for fear that doing so is going to land you in the hospital or worse? No?! And on a less physical note, have you had a job offer and then seriously had to think "poo poo, I'd better tell my employer about my genital configuration, just in case they freak out and fire me after I've moved halfway around the world". Do you seriously think "poo poo, there's large sections of the world where my existence is literally criminalised and I can't visit". Do you get very nervous when you have to use public toilets - even if you live in a state that protects your rights to use them? Having people who are in this situation tell you that you're being an rear end in a top hat does not constitute oppression.
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 11:28 |
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:i like how you are using "existence" the same way the zionist government of Israel does when they defend their right to exist You mean how being transgendered is literally illegal in a number of countries around the world? Please. Go ahead, tell me your preferred choice of wording for this.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:"transitioning from one gender to another" is a far more honest and accurate description of what is deemed illegal in those countries than is the term "existing" Thankyou for that irrelevant semantic point that makes no difference at all to the status of transgendered people. Yes, you can be trans as long as nobody ever finds out about it. That has nothing to do at all with legislating against the existence of transgendered people. I'll take your focus on this as agreement with my substantive point - that having someone in this position tell you you're an rear end in a top hat does not constitute oppression. DeathMuffin fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Second, I'm not being the gatekeeper here. I don't have that power. I can say what I think and believe. But by the same token, you aren't not in a position that anyone who doesn't tow your line is being disrespectful. You can't declare that by fiat, you have to appeal to already existing notions of respect. So the issue with cis vs. trans and respect isn't one of denying one but granting to another, it's just the fact that you don't have to do much work if you're cis. You don't have to do anything to technically perform. It's the same standard, but the nature of reality means you can't just flip a switch and say 'okay I'm trans now'. So your argument is basically "People are cunts". Our argument is "no, well, actually, this is something that is ingrained societally and can be changed".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Well no, that's somewhat anti-social to believe that. It's acknowledging that society is something different from you, and that if you want acceptance in that society, you have to appeal to it in some way. "I believe I am this person, deep inside, different from what I look like" <- Why should anyone else care about this? Why should anyone else go out of their way to respect this? Social change happens. It's not really important what your deeply held beliefs are, it's important how you treat and respect people. If someone says "I'm a woman", and makes an effort to look like such, even if they're 6'4" and look like a bricklayer, then it's just common loving courtesy to treat them as such. Nobody is asking you to sit there and not intrinsically go "omg, this person is obviously trans". Nobody is asking you to find them attractive. We're asking you to sit there and treat people as the gender that they intrinsically identify with, even if it seems difficult for a cisgendered person to understand. DeathMuffin fucked around with this message at 02:16 on Mar 25, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
Atasnaya Vaflja posted:Also if your gender is unenjoyable, difficult, and limiting, perhaps you should consider that it's not the correct gender for you and you might feel more comfortable identifying another way. If you feel that way toward your gender, like it was something hefted onto you like a burden that you're not comfortable with... Well, you may not necessarily be cis, my friend. This could explain a lot tbh.. I even went through a (mercifully short) obnoxious MRA phase when I was in denial
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:Are you kidding? Doesn't this go against the very idea of transsexualism? There were just 5 posts saying "trans is not a choice." Which is how I've always had it explained to me, that trans people feel inherantly "wrong" and as if they're stuck in the wrong body. But according to you, if some woman in a third world country finds her gender role unenjoyable, difficult, and limiting, lol, then maybe she's really a man. Only if you're determined to interpret it this way to win a stupid point on the internet. How you are isn't a choice. What you do about it - whether it's transitioning, living a life of confusion and misery, aggressively denying it to the point of arguing against the rights of your own people, or putting a bullet in your head - that's a choice, I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:So all women complaining about things like the burdens of traditional female labor and the stifling effects of strict gender roles should be informed that maaaaybe they feel this way because they're not really women. So, you know what your problem is? You've got this opportunity to discuss with at least two people about exactly where they're coming from - about their innate subjective experiences. Instead, what you're doing is putting as much effort in as possible to pick semantic holes in their descriptions about their lived experiences to try and either a) support your own preconceived notions or b) just stir people up on the interwebs. Basically, your problem is that you're a douche, and unfortunately, there's not a lot of treatment for it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:I didn't get to choose my ethnic heritage either. I can choose how much I let that heritage inform my life and character, I can choose to internalize and express various aspects of my ancestral ethnic background, or I can choose not to. I can choose to speak with an accent of my people's native tongue, or I can choose not to. I can decide how much and which aspects of the cards which I was dealt will influence my life and how much I will embrace them into my sense of who I am, but what I cannot (or should not) do, is put on blackface or tape my eyes so they look squinty and start demanding that other people treat me as a member of an ethnic community that I didn't come from. Wow, give the man a prize for "dumb argument that nobody has ever made up before". Counting down until he compares us with furries.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:assume i'm totally autistic (i may be, you don't know), and please explain to me exactly how appropriating another gender CANNOT BE COMPARED to appropriating another ethnicity Maybe because there hasn't been tens of thousands of years of history of people, across all cultures, identifying as other ethnicities for reasons totally independent of the perceived advantages of that ethnicity? Maybe because there seems to be evidence of biological concordance (including twin studies) in non-normative gender identification. Maybe because we're us *ALL THE TIME*, not just putting on some war bonnet at a music festival. Even when it's uncomfortable or dangerous to us Of course, if you are actually autistic (and you're right - I don't know), you'll probably pick on some tiny issue and totally ignore the broad picture.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
Atasnaya Vaflja posted:Do you know what the word "might" means? I'm also not sure you used the word "role" either. There's a huge difference between gender and gender role. Sucrose: This might actually blow your mind I know, but butch tomboy trans women actually exist. As do effeminate trans men.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:I'm talking about gender roles, not identities. As was the original poster you were responding to at the time you suggested they might not be cis. I don't think anyone's going to argue with "if you're a man and you feel like a woman, you might be transexual." So, where did she mention that you might be uncomfortable with your gender *role* rather than your gender.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:the part where you can assert your gender based on what makes you feel comfortable and expect others to indulge your self-image when >99.9% of people have simply been told by society what their gender is and had to deal with it Where 99.9% of people literally have no problem with their gender identity is what you actually mean. If you feel like you're having to *deal* with your gender. (NOT YOUR GENDER ROLE OR SOCIETAL EXPECTATIONS OF IT OR WHETHER YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO WALK AROUND IN A DRESS OR WHETHER YOU FEEL THAT BEING A MAN IS TOO MUCH EXPECTATION - FOR THE PITUITARY RETARDS HERE), that it's an intrinsic burden so intense that you feel like you're not actually privileged in society compared to the people who actually have to call their future employers and say "hey, you know, I'm transitioning, I thought I should tell you", with a significant expectation that you might not actually end up starting. Or that you worry about a wave of legislation being passed which makes you have to choose between being arrested or being assaulted every time you want to use the loo. Then holy poo poo - you might be one of us. Or not.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:maybe, but if you're a man, how can you have any idea what it feels like to be a woman? Because of course, all women have exactly the same experience of womanhood. Thankyou for your insight here. Are there any other "best of TERF arguments we've all heard a million times before" you have lined up?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:this is a privileged attitude, it's the privilege of victimhood where you assume (a prejudiced assumption) that the grass is Literally Perfectly Green in everyone else's side of the fence. There is a lot of psychological literature on gender identity and its difference from gender roles. Since I think the likelihood of you arguing in good faith is vanishingly small, I'm not going to spend more time- since if you're really interested, you'll look it up. Instead, I'm going to get on with my immeasurably better post-transitioning life and smile about the amount of it that I'm not wasting arguing with sad cunts on the internet who seem to have no greater pleasures. Much love to you.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
[edit: deleted]
DeathMuffin fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Mar 25, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:if you can help, i'm trying to be open, but an open mind is not the same thing as automatically accepting your world view (and to be frank, a lot of people arguing in such bad faith is making it more difficult than it should be) Your post history suggests you're not trying to be open, and that you are arguing in bad faith. I'm sorry if you're not, but you might want to work on this if you want people to engage. This is my perception of you, and it's clearly more valid than your own internal beliefs in how you are.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:No it's that some people have 'em(also some people are them but that's another issue) and that happens to be kind of a v. big deal when it comes to gender and ignoring that leads to absurdities where stagings of The Vagina Monologues are protested as horrible reactionary TERF nonsense that possession of a uterus and the capacity to conceive and undergo parturition can be said to play a major role in shaping and defining the lives of women. Indeed it does, but you're getting very close to the claim that cis women who *can't* have children aren't really women either. And this is the fundamental problem. Other than making a circular argument - that trans women aren't women because the definition of a woman is not a trans woman, there's not one single attribute that you can choose that will exclude trans women that doesn't exclude at least some cis women from the definition of women. So, now we get to the stupid stage of "you're a woman if you cross some arbitrary proportion of boxes".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:An impassible gulf between gender artists and functional adults. Just as well that the vast weight of clinical research shows that people allowed to transition (particularly in a supporting environment) improve their personal and social functioning significantly. This is why the (very conservative) psychiatric profession is almost entirely behind this as a thing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Your use of 'Their identity' has got me thinking of another way to frame this, to really put my point across - you, as a person, do not own your identity. Like I don't like the comparison to cultural appropriation, because I've had that conversation and it's not worth derailing this one, but the general idea is that inclusion into a group is not under your control, and that's the case for both gender and cultures. They're social groups, and your inclusion is conditional on everyone else's approval. FWIW, I actually agree that this is how things are - societally you're a woman or a man if people will accept you as a woman or a man, and that your appearance is important in that. What I'm arguing against is that this is particularly intellectually defensible - that if you happen to be 6'4" and look like a bricklayer then you're somehow less of a woman than if you're 5'5" and a bit feminine looking, with all other things being equal - effectively that the validity of your identity is related entirely to your appearance. I'm also arguing that these goalposts are continually moved because there's a belief amongst many (but a decreasing number) of people that trans people are their natally assigned gender rather than their asserted one. It's what Julia Serrano refers to as "conditional cis privilege" - if you're not so visibly trans people will grant you the privilege of being gendered as you identify, as long as they never find out what you were assigned at birth. Hilariously, I'm at that weird phase at the moment where I can claim I'm a trans man and people will instantly switch from "you're not really a woman" to "you're not really a man".
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
rudatron posted:But do you see the problem I had before then, when you + others were talking to Commie NedFlanders, where a lot of response to him boiled down to 'but I really am a woman'? It should be 'I believe I should be seen as', not 'I am'. Now go back to his arguments, substitutes that response in, and see how absurd they now seem. What I actually see is you eliding the substantive point of my argument, which is basically what others have said.. That yes this is how you may be perceived by society, but no that this is not intellectually or logically defensible. Butch lesbian cis women may be misgendered from time to time based on their appearance but there's usually a huge amount of apologia when they're corrected. Because there is a prejudiced belief that what the doctor wrote on your birth certificate when he pulled you out of the womb is the be all and end all of gender. If all you want to say is "I don't think trans women are women", then fine. But you're going to have a difficult time actually justifying it on any basis other than "nya nya nya nya", unless you're prepared to also say some cis women aren't women.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
blowfish posted:It's simply not worth bothering with the first more private kind of identity in a society where everyone doesn't know everyone else. People who care about it (either way - both people wanting everyone to make a big deal out of their special snowflake status and people who flip their poo poo over the fact that people privately identify as something unusual) need to get over the fact that modern society is not a stone age tribe anymore. Yay! Now, if society would get the gently caress on with letting us do that... that'd be great. quote:See above: the best position to take would be "who gives a poo poo about that, sidiviscuous is first and foremost a shitposter on a dead gay kkkomedy forum" quote:There have been 8113 posts made by blowfish, an average of 6.42 posts per day, since registering on Oct 11, 2012. blowfish claims to be a porpoise. Lol.. All that life vanished arguing pointless crap in circles.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
Stinky_Pete posted:It's a basic day-to-day aspect of humanity that we don't even notice until we find someone disputing a trans person's gender, and it's never not been a jerk who can only tell from things the person can't control, even though what they're going for is obvious. The point is I guess that IRL, there are a lot of jerks around - including a lot with real political power. If you're just arguing it on a forum, then you have the luxury of looking at that thread in isolation. The other point is that it being a vanishing edge case or not, if you're asked by someone to gender them one way, you should - regardless of what they're doing or what they look like. Trans women are held to an unrealistic double standard of femininity in a lot of cases - they're expected to conform to a level of femininity that would not be asked for cis women - who are allowed to be tomboyish or even overtly masculine in their behaviour. Of course, they're not expected to be *too* feminine, otherwise "they're trying too hard and it's probably just a sex thing". It's pretty damned impolite saying "I'll define the standards by which I will deign to gender you appropriately - even after you've told me how you wish to be gendered". Particularly since people in the same situation who had found out that the person they were misgendering was cis would almost all be terribly apologetic and correct themselves. DeathMuffin fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Mar 26, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Not at all, behaviors are verifiable in a way in which feelings are not. So for example, the usual ring of tests you are required to do before your legal sex change, are designed to weed out people who are not committed, or mistaken. Yet functionally all it is measuring is your behavior. This is actually how it used to work in the bad old days, where gatekeepers with attitudes not dissimilar to yours (are you going to look non cisnormative, do you like guys or girls, because if you're not doing it right, then you're probably not what you say you are) judged to see if your behaviors warranted your self determination. Increasingly, current practice is to ensure that the person requesting treatment is capable of making an informed decision, and can form a clear intent to transition. You know, basically asking them about their feelings. Legal recognition is a function of local area prejudices more than anything, but in many jurisdictions a letter from a doctor saying you're being treated is sufficient for drivers licenses, passports and more. Of course, every discussion about trans issues is full of cis people speaking authoritatively 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
[edit: argh, why am I still posting in this idiotic thread]
DeathMuffin fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Mar 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:I know 3 trans people IRL, they're all of the same sentiment As someone who is trans and binary af, I don't get nb people in exactly the same way I'd hope that cis people don't really get trans binary people.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
Sulphuric rear end in a top hat posted:According to the scientific journal, "Jurassic Park" developing babies are all female until the introduction of certain hormones. I could see it reasonable that differing amounts of hormones in the mother could produce more feminine or masculine traits in a fetus of the opposite biological sex. Other than the SRY gene encoding for a couple of proteins that begin testicular development (with the associated production of anti-mullerian hormone to cause regression of the Müllerian ducts which usually differentiate into the female reproductive tract), it's all hormones. And here's where the definition of biological sex gets tricky. What happens if SRY is absent or ineffective on the Y chromosome. Or if has been crossed onto an X chromosome during spermatogenesis. DeathMuffin fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Mar 30, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 11:28 |
|
|
SHISHKABOB posted:So in other words, there are no male eggs/sperm or female eggs/sperm. They're all the same. Is that right? No. It's that foetally we have both sets of ducts that differentiate into the male and female reproductive tracts. Sexual differentiation is initiated by a single gene (usually) on the Y chromosome, which causes a cascade of hormones which do everything else. If you are insensitive to testosterone you develop phenotypically female. If that gene is actually present on the X chromosome you develop phenotypically male .. Plus many other configurations
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2016 16:34
|
|