"I'm offended on behalf of my gender for the idea that men are somehow responsible for these violent trans freaks". Feminists and anti-feminists argue about who is responsible for trans women in /r/gendercritical (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
44 ups - 0 downs = 44 votes
219 comments submitted at 13:32:10 on Jul 31, 2014 by empress_of_feels
It's not "hating trans people" to disagree with the claim that they are or have/can become the opposite sex.
Unless you're the type who thinks it's "hating Christians" to be unconvinced by their claims and other similar views.
Denying people their identity is hateful.
So I guess it's hateful to not refer to otherkin and furries by their preferred species and pronouns, right?
Because "Over my life I have had the mental/emotional experiences of the opposite gender based on my understanding of them," is totally equivocal to "I demand that I be legally recognized as a squirrel from outer space."
It seems your argument is essentially the same as Rick Santorum's argument that if gay people are allowed to exist, then next thing we know people will be trying to marry dogs and turtles. So congrats on being in such appropriate company I guess?
> It's not "hating trans people" to disagree with the claim that they are or have/can become the opposite sex.
lol yes it is
"I don't hate them I just think that their entire identity is a lie and that they're freaks!"
wat I thought it was opposite gender and sex was chromosomal hence the need to invent the term gender. isn't that where gender theory gets all weird in that we accept that transgendered women can be different (ie non-ops having penises) but are still women giving credence to the fact that their are physiological differences but they are of the same gender? and wouldn't assuming she was of cisgendered build just because she was trans be discrimination of "passing" or passing privilege?
>It's not "hating trans people" to disagree with the claim that they are or have/can become the opposite sex.
So gender roles are a strict unchanging thing?
Gender roles are an arbitrary standard of behavior and expectations placed on people due to their sex.
If you think someone has to change sex in order to not adhere to the gender roles for their sex, then you're the one who considers them immutable.
If you think that gender is just reducible to social expectations, you need to look at the John Money fiasco. People have a gender identity in the same way they have a sexuality, and if you try to force them into another one you'll fuck them up mentally.
The John Money fiasco where he encouraged parents to give their son a sex change after a botched circumcision and then sexually abused him? What is that supposed to prove about gender roles not being expectations?
Because Money's whole shtick was based on the idea that gender roles were nothing more than expectations and that you could socialize a man into being a woman in order to conform him to his surgically altered genitalia. Are you saying that if the other stuff hadn't happened Reimer would have been fine?
And his attempt to socialize Reimer as a girl was to force him to mimic sex acts with his brother. If you think that's an accurate demonstration of gendered socialization, and if you think all women are on board with their gendered socialization in the first place (hint: feminism), you're a bit fucked in the head.
And obviously I don't think he would have been fine as I don't think sex changes are a scientific reality.
last chance.
With all due respect I fail to see how I can avoid the conversation topic of this thread.
Not repeatedly referring to trans women as men would be a good start
I don't think we're going to keep arguing this, but I just wanted to clarify:
Cross-sibling 'sexual' attraction in younger kids is an actual thing. The reason Money did all that stuff and de facto sexually abused Reimer was because he was convinced that you could frog-march somebody through the phases of gender socialization in the family and thereby alter their gender. Whether you're for or against that kind of socialization is at best irrelevant to the question of whether it's even possible to do what Money was trying to do.
In any case, I think that while the childhood abuse clearly played a major role in Reimer's later mental state, I think being repeatedly forced into being surgically mutilated probably also played a major role. You can twist that fact into an opposition to 'sex changes' in general, but the fact remains that there are people who report overwhelmingly positive psychological effects from getting one. Unless you want to go full Scientology and conclude that these people are all being mislead by sinister gender therapists, endocrinologists, and surgeons, you're going to have to be a compassionate and rational human being for five minutes and concede that they exist and that they're different from yourself.
No, I saying that a person that feels that they are a women, goes though all the work to have an appearance they feel comfortable with, should be treated like the gender they want to be....because intersectionality is a motherfucker.
I define "woman" as "adult human female". Why should I do that if I don't agree?
Because your definition sucks, and generally its hard to get sympathy for your plight if you can't take a simple inconvenience for others. Kinda the reason the NAACP is the go to organization, unlike the Nation of Islam.
Playing devil's advocate this isn't a simple inconvenience in this case, as it has placed a volatile person with a lot more aggression and a lot more strength in confinement with youths who can't match that and in many cases will be vulnerable as well.
>State officials have been well aware of Doe's situation: In February, DCF commissioner Joette Katz cited her case—incorrectly claiming that she had broken a staff member's jaw—when she asked the Connecticut Legislature for funds to open a new girls' prison. She said it showed why high-security facility for juveniles was needed. The Legislature appropriated $2.6 million, and the facility has since been opened. But Doe, officials say, is too dangerous to be placed in that facility.
>a lot more aggression and a lot more strength
She's on HRT and never went through male puberty. Your concerns don't apply.
> Because your definition sucks
...Because it's accurate?
> its hard to get sympathy for your plight if you can't take a simple inconvenience for others
So why isn't it the trans movement that should take the inconvenience of not controlling other people's opinions and language? A person can do whatever they want with their own mind, body and life, but I don't see why I have to be involved.
Just don't be an inconsiderate asshole about it. That's as "involved" as you need to be.
I don't feel it's inconsiderate to not defer to someone else's beliefs that you don't share.
So you're only a decent human being to people who believe exactly the same things you do? That's a pretty small world you live in.
You realize those people believe in what they do just as much as you believe in the things you do, right? Just because you don't agree with them doesn't make their beliefs any less real to them.
If using a different pronoun is beyond your empathetical grasp then you've got serious issues.
Okay, then I guess you're not really a feminist. I won't refer to you as one, anyway, because of these beliefs you have that I don't share.
>So why isn't it the trans movement that should take the inconvenience of not controlling other people's opinions and language?
Except they're not. They're asking you to call them women or men because they identify with that gender. What's so horrible about that? What do you lose by just being polite and identifying them as actual women?
>So why isn't it the women's rights movement that should take the inconvenience of not controlling other people's opinions and language?
FTFY
Call me when feminists are insisting on getting prostate examinations they don't need in the name of equality and are sending death and rape threats to people who don't use the spelling "womyn".
Nah, I'll call an actual feminist.
I thought you were trying to argue a point here. Instead you're just arguing against stuff you made up in your own head. How disappointing.
What do you think about studies like this one or this one?
Edit: Even if there weren't a biological element, isn't a lower rate of suicide relative to those who don't get treated for gender dysphoria enough of a reason to seek it?
one time when i cited those studies after i got told i believed feels > reals the person just kind of went "well... okay but i don't think it's good enough don't cite science that disagrees with me"
It's usually either "pseudo-science" or "fabricated by the Gay Mafia"
Gender roles suck, I prefer to assign people roles based on their sex, like any good feminist, thank you very much.
Way to willfully misinterpret what I just said. Gender roles are assigned due to sex. Never said they should be. But if you think it makes sense for someone change sex in order to adopt behaviors and tastes deemed only appropriate for the opposite sex by society, then you're the one in support of strict gender roles.
Except I'm not. The official trans narrative is that there is no true Trans Narrative. Trans girls can dress masculine and have traditionally boyish hobbies and interests because that isn't what trans people refer to as Gender.
You are telling other people what they are as though you have any authority as to what constitutes a man or a woman, and further, you seem to be inferring things about these people with only your assumed narrative in mind. This is the very concept of Gender Roles you so desire to overthrow. It's not Feminism in any means because it serves to undermine a person's agency in deciding what Gender means to that individual.
TERFs sit around acting like they need to tell all women, Cis and Trans, why they are or are not women, as though that matters in a movement dedicated to undermining and fighting Gender roles.
TERF argue that Trans Women are invaders to their movement, but in essence, they are merely invaders to the TERF's Genders, which I wouldn't think would be too much of a problem in a movement that decries these Gender barriers.
TERFs argue that Trans Women are only in it for the expression of the artificial femininity, which I infer to mean that they believe feminine cis women are inferior, a way of judging a person based on the Gender Role and Expression they choose.
TERFs argue that Trans Women invade safe spaces and present a threat to Cis Women in those spaces, assigning the weak and helpless narrative to those cis women, and an aggressor narrative to the trans woman, whether or not this be the case.
TERFs claim they want woman's Liberation, when what they want is Woman's authority. But not all women, just those that adhere to their narrative.
So you're saying you know better than qualified medical professionals? You must know a lot about transgenderism.