Transgender - Part 2

[Gethelred]

Please be aware that the tolerance of anti-trans language on BF is at an all-time low. Jokes and insults that are trans-related, as well as anti-trans and bigoted rhetoric will be met with infractions, threadbans etc as required. It's a sensitive (and important) topic, so behave like well-mannered adults when discussing it, PARTICULARLY when disagreeing. This equally applies across the whole site.

 

[ShanDog]

It's also interesting how perspectives seem to shift depending on how individuals in this thread seem to think they'll be received. A month or more ago, it was purely fairness in women's sport and trans women could behave or be treated with respect and deference to their need to be treated as their chosen gender.

This feels like a reverse motte and bailey argument, with you - the collective you - choosing to retake ground now you think you're safe to do so as opposed to retreating to the bailey after conceding the motte.

Meh, the exact same can be said about trans rights activists with the specifics changed to suit the increase in support trans people have had as time has gone on. It's hardly insightful to suggest that attitudes shift with time and events.

And yet still, there's no problem in holding two separate ideas at once - trans women aren't women, and trans people have the same basic rights and deserve the same basic respects as humans as everyone else.

 

[Gethelred]

This is all ridiculous.

Trans women are different to women, quite obviously. There's the whole **** n balls thing that is usually a point of difference among other significant biological differences, including that pesky method of procreation issue that no amount of ideological brainwashing can rationalise away.

That's the point, Shan.

Trans people - and I don't particularly want to speak for them as I'm not one - feel their dysphoria because there are obvious biological differences, differences that prevent them feeling normal or comfortable ever.

If we're seeking clarity of meaning, then the split between gender and biology should make more sense, not less.

That's what the crux of my problem is with pushback against saying trans women aren't women. I don't have to pretend to believe in someone's god just to say I respect their religion.

Is this an apples to apples comparison?

Don't try to guilt me into pretending that a male presenting themselves in a (usually way overcompensating) stereotypically female way is literally a woman.

Wasn't guilting you into saying shit.

The point of forcing you to acknowledge that no, your eyes/senses are not perfect and yes, there are trans people - of all genders - that can absolutely pass as either of the binary is that this demonstrates the separation of gender from biology because those individuals who pass get treated differently than those that don't.

If you don't want to type the words, it's fine.

I know what that word means and there's nothing wrong with the definition. I don't need to give up the integrity of my own rational brain in order to be tolerant (or even better - completely and utterly indifferent) to someone with gender dysphoria and treat them as equals. Asking me to lie is not being treated as equals.

This is an appeal to a notion of egalitarianism which is twisted into a distorted pretzel.

 

[Gethelred]

Meh, the exact same can be said about trans rights activists with the specifics changed to suit the increase in support trans people have had as time has gone on. It's hardly insightful to suggest that attitudes shift with time and events.

And yet still, there's no problem in holding two separate ideas at once - trans women aren't women, and trans people have the same basic rights and deserve the same basic respects as humans as everyone else.

... except, you're preventing them from playing the role which they choose within society. That is manifestly not treating people with 'the same basic respects' as everyone else.

If someone is quadriplegic, you ensure building access by building them a ramp. How is this any different?

 

[ShanDog]

... except, you're preventing them from playing the role which they choose within society. That is manifestly not treating people with 'the same basic respects' as everyone else.

If someone is quadriplegic, you ensure building access by building them a ramp. How is this any different?

Incorrect, I don't stop or prevent anyone doing absolutely anything. This is a common shitty argument.

You really wanna compare someone with a disability to a trans person? That shit will get you cancelled!
I mean, at least my religious analogy was associated with identity and beliefs. I posted a very good philosophical article about this a while ago - did you read it?

If we're seeking clarity of meaning, then the split between gender and biology should make more sense, not less.

I totally agree, yet the TW are women line is not how to do it. It muddies things. The language is still unclear for the majority of people because women and female have meant something specific forever.

 

[Gethelred]

Incorrect, I don't stop or prevent anyone doing absolutely anything. This is a common shitty argument.

... just so we're clear, then.

The research into the correct way to deal with gender dysphoria over a substantial period of time, which has led to the current approach for dealing with transgenderism - ie, gender acceptance and transition...

Are you disputing it?

'Cause if you're not and you're still arguing against gender affirmative care, you are wilfully arguing against equality for those people as they would define it. You're arguing for their exclusion from society - again, it's interesting how it was just sport before and now it's this - because you're unwilling to do what it takes to include them, which costs you precious little.

You really wanna compare someone with a disability to a trans person? That shit will get you cancelled!

This is quite probably where you're getting muddled.

I'm sure there's someone out there who would cancel me for saying that; there's someone out there who'd cancel you for saying pretty much anything.

I mean, at least my religious analogy was associated with identity and beliefs. I posted a very good philosophical article about this a while ago - did you read it?

I might've at the time, it depends on how long ago it was.

I've also been busy marking, so it's taken me some time to get back here.

I totally agree, yet the TW are women line is not how to do it. It muddies things. The language is still unclear for the majority of people because women and female have meant something specific forever.

I really don't see how. It's an exceedingly simple distinction, created to better describe things.

While some theorists - feminist and gender - might take the idea that to be a woman is to adhere to an aesthetic of womanhood - to conform - poorly, that'd be an outgrowth of John Money's views as the creator of the concept in order to protect and enshrine the two genders as binary, as his research into sexual dimorphism wasn't proving it sufficiently to his tastes. There are conservative branches of feminism just as there are progressive ones; not that John Money - who was a creep - was a feminist, but whenever you seize an idea you tend towards taking the parts which are useful to you and some feminists are a bit... opposed to redefining femininity.

The water is only muddied because you keep dragging your feet through the silt at the bottom. You don't even have to step in it; the whole situation and shebang doesn't really affect you to my knowledge.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I love it that MEN are instructing (mansplaining) WOMEN as to what they must believe and accept. What’s in it for them? Men should stay out of it. Women can decide for themselves if they want to admit a man into their ranks. Some will, some won’t, fully.

How many men will accept a trans man into their brotherhood? It doesn’t happen.

 

[gouki88]

I love it that MEN are instructing (mansplaining) WOMEN as to what they must believe and accept. What’s in it for them? Men should stay out of it. Women can decide for themselves if they want to admit a man into their ranks. Some will, some won’t, fully.

How many men will accept a trans man into their brotherhood? It doesn’t happen.

Beating a boring TERFy horse here

 

[Gethelred]

I love it that MEN are instructing (mansplaining) WOMEN as to what they must believe and accept. What’s in it for them? Men should stay out of it. Women can decide for themselves if they want to admit a man into their ranks. Some will, some won’t, fully.

How many men will accept a trans man into their brotherhood? It doesn’t happen.

I'm not arguing with women in this thread. I'm arguing with a collection of other men. I'm interested in the trap you're trying to set here: men need to be a part of the solution, but I'm supposedly mansplaining when I argue with you.

I also think it's rather funny that you didn't tag me when clearly referring to me.

 

[the_interloper]

I'm not arguing with women in this thread. I'm arguing with a collection of other men. I'm interested in the trap you're trying to set here: men need to be a part of the solution, but I'm supposedly mansplaining when I argue with you.

I also think it's rather funny that you didn't tag me when clearly referring to me.

To be fair it's a common argument that women (aka TERFs) often make.

 

[Gethelred]

To be fair it's a common argument that women (aka TERFs) often make.

... which the following sentence is my reply:

I'm interested in the trap you're trying to set here: men need to be a part of the solution, but I'm supposedly mansplaining when I argue with you.

I have no time for argument traps. The point of argument is truth or progress towards it, not winning.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I'm not arguing with women in this thread. I'm arguing with a collection of other men. I'm interested in the trap you're trying to set here: men need to be a part of the solution, but I'm supposedly mansplaining when I argue with you.

I also think it's rather funny that you didn't tag me when clearly referring to me.

I'm assuming there are no women in the thread.

 

[burge13]

I'm assuming there are no women in the thread.

Dangerous assumption, we can be women if we want to be!

 

[the_interloper]

... which the following sentence is my reply:

I have no time for argument traps. The point of argument is truth or progress towards it, not winning.

I'm not trying to trap you here, just wondering how you would engage with a TERF female in this discussion.

 

[Chief]

How many men will accept a trans man into their brotherhood? It doesn’t happen.

What does this even mean?

"Brotherhood"? Is this a capes and pentagrams in the basement thing?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I'm not trying to trap you here, just wondering how you would engage with a TERF female in this discussion.

Same way he engages with Carringbush or Dogs R Us, but with different pronouns.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

What does this even mean?

"Brotherhood"? Is this a capes and pentagrams in the basement thing?

You'd call women collectively, the sisterhood. It's an expression. Why not brotherhood for men? What would you call it?

 

[Gralin]

What does this even mean?

"Brotherhood"? Is this a capes and pentagrams in the basement thing?

Sounds lit I'm in

 

[Chief]

You'd call women collectively, the sisterhood.

Not really how I refer to women. Some people might.

It's an expression. Why not brotherhood for men? What would you call it?

If you want to, fine. Not a common thing that people do, really.

How many men will accept a trans man into their brotherhood? It doesn’t happen.

I'm happy to accept trans men as men if that's what they want. So, it does happen.

Why should it bother you?

 

[the_interloper]

Same way he engages with Carringbush or Dogs R Us, but with different pronouns.

Good luck with that, women certainly take a dim view generally of blokes disagreeing with them on women's issues.

You'd call women collectively, the sisterhood. It's an expression. Why not brotherhood for men? What would you call it?

The patriarchy of course!

 

[Gethelred]

Good luck with that, women certainly take a dim view generally of blokes disagreeing with them on women's issues.

I mean...

I've had lengthy conversations concerning feminism at university with women, had to to complete my undergrad. I've discussed gender and sexuality specifically in a class I've mentioned more than once on this forum; this is not something I've not done.

Is this something you have tested, discussing this sort of thing with people who don't agree with you IRL? Or is it an assumption?

While I'm sure there are any number of people who might react adversely to a man making feminist arguments (antifeminists among them) men need to play a role in dismantling the patriarchy. It's not just for equality or justice for women, although that'd be a pretty decent reason by itself. Men are damaged by the expectations and gender roles for men within patriarchal systems as well.

 

[the_interloper]

I mean...

I've had lengthy conversations concerning feminism at university with women, had to to complete my undergrad. I've discussed gender and sexuality specifically in a class I've mentioned more than once on this forum; this is not something I've not done.

Is this something you have tested, discussing this sort of thing with people who don't agree with you IRL? Or is it an assumption?

While I'm sure there are any number of people who might react adversely to a man making feminist arguments (antifeminists among them) men need to play a role in dismantling the patriarchy. It's not just for equality or justice for women, although that'd be a pretty decent reason by itself. Men are damaged by the expectations and gender roles for men within patriarchal systems as well.

Absolutely, I mean not all women are aligned with the version of feminism they subscribe to, and no i'm not really going to try and tell them they're wrong that's for sure.

Generally speaking, other than my wife my discussions of feminism doesn't extend much past agreement or "no comment" about things I don't agree with, it's a lot safer that way.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Absolutely, I mean not all women are aligned with the version of feminism they subscribe to, and no i'm not really going to try and tell them they're wrong that's for sure.

Generally speaking, other than my wife my discussions of feminism doesn't extend much past agreement or "no comment" about things I don't agree with, it's a lot safer that way.

Most men don't understand how women think at all. They probably all think a bit differently about feminism, for instance, as well as many other subjects. That's why trans women can't fit in, in the way they want. They can be very nice people to be friends with but they don't think like women. Many would acknowledge that.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I've had lengthy conversations concerning feminism at university with women, had to to complete my undergrad. I've discussed gender and sexuality specifically in a class I've mentioned more than once on this forum; this is not something I've not done.

That tells me everything necessary. I think you need to diversify your sources.

 

[CM86]

Most men don't understand how women think at all. They probably all think a bit differently about feminism, for instance, as well as many other subjects. That's why trans women can't fit in, in the way they want. They can be very nice people to be friends with but they don't think like women. Many would acknowledge that.

Does a single other poster in this thread agree with this???

 

[Chief]

Does a single other poster in this thread agree with this???

Sounds like the plot to that rom-com.