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]

You wouldn't think so but weirdos gonna weirdo.

There are lots of dummies who breed, I'll give you that

 

[the_interloper]

I've been fortunate to have met a lot of different people, but meeting them is only half of it, listening to them and learning to ask the right questions to hear their insight is the other half.


I'm a non-white bisexual cis male, but it's easy enough to pass as white online, and to pass as straight anywhere. I sympathise with your situation, as it can't be fun being dismissed out of hand like that. At the same time, I understand why women tend to do that, because most (if not all) of them have faced a lot of disrespect and belittlement, mostly from straight white men. That isn't your fault, but others have poisoned the well, just as they have for other things, like the fears and hangups some women have around dating men. I once dated a woman who had sworn to stay off cishet men forever because of how they'd treated her, and she only even gave me a chance because I'm bisexual.

I do think that for anything that involves the lived experience of others that we can't actually experience for ourselves, we are generally better off listening to those who have that experience. Not that those people will all agree either. I've certainly had vehement disagreements with other non-white people on the extent of racism in Australia, from both sides. I've found non-white people who claim there isn't any at all, and others who have blamed all their failings on racism when there are clearly other factors at play.

But perhaps when we've listened to enough of the lived experience of others, we can speak on a subject by repeating the consensus opinion of those we've listened to. For example, I once heard a speech by a man who was talking about the challenges of proper stance in high heels, not that he'd worn them himself enough to know, but because he'd listened to his wife and sister and friends enough to learn and understand. He asked the women in the room if they agreed with what he was saying, and they did.

It is hard if you're disagreeing with a woman and don't have another woman to back you up. I once expressed such a thought to a cis woman on the subject of the acceptance of trans women. That if I was facing off against a TERF, it's hard to speak against a woman on something relating to the subject of womanhood. Her response was to say that I wouldn't be mansplaining if I was simply repeating the feelings of her and other women like her. But that only works because I listened enough to begin with to understand what her feelings were and why she held them.

It's still a minefield, and I'd never call myself an authority on the subject, but that's how I navigate speaking on the acceptance of trans women as women, even if my audience includes cis women. Even then it's important for me to listen to lived experiences and perspectives I hadn't considered, so long as they're not coming from a place of pure intolerance or hatred like certain very prominent transphobes do.

Bloody good post, and if more blokes were like you I think women wouldn't be as dismissive of our opinions as a group, not a lot of blokes could be ****ed taking the time to understand their issues in details let's be honest.

The bolded is fair enough, if you have a specific example/s from women's experiences that would add value to the discussion, and it's not you saying it it's someone else. I guess there's an art to not outright disagreeing with them but adding that as part of a discussion.

I recently reported a work colleague for being sexist to another female colleague in front of a group of male customers. She brought us all in drinks and this ****wit says to her "thanks love". Now in isolation maybe it's not the worst thing but was in front of a group of blokes and he said it to demean her and make her feel like shit, so I told management and told the ******** off privately too.

One of the other women in the office privately told me she didn't think it was that bad and that I might have overreacted. I tried to not disagree with her but outline the whole situation and why it was so bad and ultimately unprofessional in front of customers, we sort of agreed to disagree, was an awkward conversation tbh.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Any time a doctor uses your pronouns you're getting gender affirming care

That’s like one of your number asserting that the Jewish hostage held in a Gazan doctor’s apartment was receiving medical care

 

[faible]

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

There's been at least two transgender posters in this thread I'm aware of that have said so publicly, most other posters haven't identified their gender.

People posting should remember that whilst perhaps they might not be engaging directly in the thread at this time, there's very real transgender people on this forum, who have read this thread previously, who are just as much people deserving of a basic level of respect and humanity as anyone else does. Not directing this comment at you specifically.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

So sick of the politeness argument in conjunction with arguing against a group of peoples rights or freedoms

Queue Shan saying what rights and eye rolling while talking about engaging in bad faith

Politely being a campaigner is still being a campaigner

Cue

 

[Carringbush2010]

Oh and just for those playing at home, none of what Gralin says here about me is correct. It's just easier to put me in the box labelled transphobic than actually deal with the significant issues when you're so invested in being correct.

As you probably already know, you should've expected this.

It's the safe space go to when people like this misinterpret salient debate as a threat to their ideals, pick any political / social issue, it's the same. An attempt to shut down discussion by using unwarranted labels.

Fair and balanced debate that may debunk?, then go to (insert label).

 

[Carringbush2010]

I sympathise with your situation, as it can't be fun being dismissed out of hand like that.

And this is what gets the back of white males, minority groups / and or their advocates do not at all sympathize with white males (not all but most). We're just automatically dismissed based on the fact we're white males.

If any white male that discusses salient conversation that might be uncomfortable on pick any social / political issue, then immediately that person is shut down by being labelled (insert derogatory term).

But nah doesn't matter coz white males are privileged just by being, another shut down go to.

 

[Gralin]

oh we've reached the white cis males are the real victims portion of the discourse I see

 

[faible]

oh we've reached the white cis males are the real victims portion of the discourse I see

I thought Johnny Bananas articulated his position quite well on it.

 

[Gethelred]

As you probably already know, you should've expected this.

It's the safe space go to when people like this misinterpret salient debate as a threat to their ideals, pick any political / social issue, it's the same. An attempt to shut down discussion by using unwarranted labels.

Fair and balanced debate that may debunk?, then go to (insert label).

... you've not used the terms 'safe space', 'fair and balanced' or even 'debunk' really correctly here. Consider revising.

 

[Gralin]

I thought Johnny Bananas articulated his position quite well on it.

I wasn't talking about Johhny

 

[Carringbush2010]

Oh look, another example of the shut down ploy

'White male plays victim card, another reason to dismiss'

 

[Chief]

And this is what gets the back of white males,

#notallwhitemales

minority groups / and or their advocates do not at all sympathize with white males (not all but most). We're just automatically dismissed based on the fact we're white males.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Oh look, another example of the shut down ploy

'White male plays victim card, another reason to dismiss'

White males aren't males.

 

[CM86]

 

[Gralin]

Oh look, another example of the shut down ploy

'White male plays victim card, another reason to dismiss'

Imagine if you put this energy into supporting marginalised groups instead of trying to maintain the status quo

 

[Carringbush2010]

Imagine if you put this energy into supporting marginalised groups instead of trying to maintain the status quo

Imagine if you used your energy to engage in good faith instead of labeling everyone a phobe.

Pot.kettle.black.

 

[burge13]

Imagine if you used your energy to engage in good faith instead of labeling everyone a phobe.

Pot.kettle.black.

You do know where you're posting right?

 

[Carringbush2010]

You do know where you're posting right?

Yeah I know it's a pointless exercise.

 

[Gralin]

Imagine if you used your energy to engage in good faith instead of labeling everyone a phobe.

Pot.kettle.black.

i dont recall this conversation being about calling people phobes

 

[the_interloper]

Looks like a fun party

 

[Carringbush2010]

supporting marginalised groups instead of trying to maintain the status quo

See this is your problem,

You give the impression that you view any balanced or practical compromise as bad faith

For example, the argument of whether or not trans women have physical advantage in sporting competition and therefore threatens the integrity of those competitions and is unfair to biological women.

Park aside the arguments for and against, everyone's been over it eleventy gazillion times.

The point is your view and others like some trans (or any minority group) activists immediately jump on the view that anyone that comes up with this argument is a bigoted phobe, this argument actually means they hate trans people.

^This is such a ridiculous and knee jerk reactive position to take, now you could argue that you don't, but you'd be fooling no one.

You do the same in regard to any minority group discussion, sad fact of life, the 'status quo' is not by want or design to punch down on minority groups, it's a byproduct of societies that are geared to the majority < that's a fact of life in any political / social issue.

But you view it as conspired intentionally, that is why I don't normally engage in conversation with you, because you have a bitter and twisted view that the world and the bulk of people in it i:e the majority is against you and minorities.

You can reply if you want, but I'll probably ignore it, because I can fairly expect the context of it.

 

[faible]

See this is your problem,

You give the impression that you view any balanced or practical compromise as bad faith

For example, the argument of whether or not trans women have physical advantage in sporting competition and therefore threatens the integrity of those competitions and is unfair to biological women.

Park aside the arguments for and against, everyone's been over it eleventy gazillion times.

The point is your view and others like some trans (or any minority group) activists immediately jump on the view that anyone that comes up with this argument is a bigoted phobe, this argument actually means they hate trans people.

^This is such a ridiculous and knee jerk reactive position to take, now you could argue that you don't, but you'd be fooling no one.

You do the same in regard to any minority group discussion, sad fact of life, the 'status quo' is not by want or design to punch down on minority groups, it's a byproduct of societies that are geared to the majority < that's a fact of life in any political / social issue.

But you view it as conspired intentionally, that is why I don't normally engage in conversation with you, because you have a bitter and twisted view that the world and the bulk of people in it i:e the majority is against you and minorities.

You can reply if you want, but I'll probably ignore it, because I can fairly expect the context of it.

FWIW a lot of times the status quo is geared to the wealthy and powerful, not necessarily the majority IMO. Especially in modern society.

The US and their tax rates is a good example, from memory the effective tax rate for the wealthy is now lower than the average income earner. That's not a society set up for the majority.

Assuming changing the status quo won't benefit the average person or majority isn't necessarily true, but has been a great exercise in marketing by those in power to convince voters to vote for things that help those in power.

 

[Gralin]

See this is your problem,

You give the impression that you view any balanced or practical compromise as bad faith

When the compromise is with a group that doesn't want trans people to exist then yeah

For example, the argument of whether or not trans women have physical advantage in sporting competition and therefore threatens the integrity of those competitions and is unfair to biological women.

Cis women works and is more accurate

Park aside the arguments for and against, everyone's been over it eleventy gazillion times.

The point is your view and others like some trans (or any minority group) activists immediately jump on the view that anyone that comes up with this argument is a bigoted phobe, this argument actually means they hate trans people.

I literally criticised people moaning that straight white guys opinions weren't being listened too but go off

^This is such a ridiculous and knee jerk reactive position to take, now you could argue that you don't, but you'd be fooling no one.

Again wasn't talking about bigotry

You do the same in regard to any minority group discussion, sad fact of life, the 'status quo' is not by want or design to punch down on minority groups, it's a byproduct of societies that are geared to the majority < that's a fact of life in any political / social issue.

30% of the population has a disability, they're technically a minority group, but a large one, yet gearing society to the majority effectively excludes almost a third of people from that society

does that seem like something that we should just shrug and let go?

and the status quo is frequently used to punch down, that's the whole point of it

But you view it as conspired intentionally, that is why I don't normally engage in conversation with you, because you have a bitter and twisted view that the world and the bulk of people in it i:e the majority is against you and minorities.

You can reply if you want, but I'll probably ignore it, because I can fairly expect the context of it.

it is intentional, those in power want it like this so when you help them maintain it or defend it you are helping those in power maintain that power at the expense of the rest of us

 

[CM86]

I recently reported a work colleague for being sexist to another female colleague in front of a group of male customers. She brought us all in drinks and this wit says to her "thanks love". Now in isolation maybe it's not the worst thing but was in front of a group of blokes and he said it to demean her and make her feel like shit, so I told management and told the **** off privately too.

One of the other women in the office privately told me she didn't think it was that bad and that I might have overreacted. I tried to not disagree with her but outline the whole situation and why it was so bad and ultimately unprofessional in front of customers, we sort of agreed to disagree, was an awkward conversation tbh.

Why do you need to be such an arseh*le?

Johnny Bananas made such an informed and honest post explaining a complex topic in such a good way.

And you reply with this sarcastic bullshit.