Trans Women Are Women. To Disagree Is Hate.

[leviathan13]

15 hours ago, Phanerothyme said:

FWIW

It strikes me that, on a intuitive level, our genetics, environment, endocrine system, brain chemistry &c. contrive to shape our sex, secondary sexual characterstics, gender, and romantic and sexual desire into a gaussian distribution across five [and more!] axes. A great big weird Hilbert-ish Space of possibilities.  Women with beards, men with soft full lips and large breasts. People who appear to be men but feel like women, who love women; who appear to be women, but feel like men who don't experience sexual desire. Quentin Crisp (The Naked Civil Servant) considered himself a 'queer man' and only very late in life conceded that he was probably a trans woman, but that option simply wasn't available to him at the time. 

A majority of people (me included) fall into a fuzzy five+ dimensional blob in the middle - what a 52 year old man might call "mostly straight men and women" - but all of human history is peppered with people who experience the world quite differently, from the famous music hall cross-dressers of the 19th century in London, to classical era androgyny, Grayson Perry & European Song Contest winners.

We used to put people into one of two boxes - Boys and Girls. Expectations, upbringing, toys and stories were strongly gendered, girls who got dirty and fought with the boy were tomboys, and the boys who played dress-up with the girls were sissies, but they stayed in their boxes because there was nowhere else to go, apart from the Royal Navy or the theatre.

We have historically always tried to repress people outside the norm (and this goes for "mental health" too) through ridicule, verbal assault, stigmatisation, violence, punitive law and endorsement of discrimination. For generations our social 'norms' have made people desperately miserable by the simple dint of denying them the validity of their own personal existence. (see also neurodiversity).

Over the last 50 years it has, for example, gradually become more acceptable to be openly gay as a man or a woman, thanks to tireless fighting and campaigning for recognition and rights.

We've opened up a few more boxes.

But as the abbreviation LGTBTQ+ might suggest there's a lot of variety among the remaining minority sex/gender/desire combos.

If they express their true selves in public as many of us do without even thinking about it, they risk ridicule, verbal abuse and even physical assault. Of course gay couples still experience this all the time, so let's not pretend that problem has been solved in any way.

Yet we're not talking about the perpetrators here -  those visiting abuse and direct violence, or those creating the atmosphere of stigmatisation and ridicule that enables them. 

 

And we need to get rid of all these boxes.

Just my €0.02c

 

You say we need to get rid of all the boxes, but the trans community are the ones adding the extra boxes: millions of extra pronouns and genders. I've just come across a new one today: NOMAP - Non-Offending Minor Attracted Person; apparently there's a movement within the LGBTQABC123  community calling for, essentially, paedophiles to be allowed to have feelings for children and for the rest of the world to be OK with it because they're 'Non-Offending' i.e. not doing anything with their desire.

 

And the problem we now have is that, at the merest hint of tomboyish behaviour or a boy showing an interest in women's' clothes and make-up, the parents are quick to push them down the trans route. The last thing a 7yo needs is to be more confused about the world than they already are.

 

A person's lifestyle can have an effect on the wider population as we're seeing with the trans-women in women's sports and biological men being allowed in to female spaces: toilets/prisons/changing rooms etc. The issue with this is that you can't even question it as you will be labelled -phobic. It's basically become a religion that cannot be scrutinised.

 

To this day, beyond man/woman/male/female, no one can tell me what a 'gender' actually is. I get told it's how someone 'identifies', but that's not an explanation. If someone is gay, that's to do with who  they're attracted to - easy.  If someone transitions from one gender to the other and goes through the full change to live as the opposite gender because they were 'born in the wrong body' - I get that and understand it, to a point. But 70+ genders? Eh? I just cannot get it and no one has managed to give a satisfactory explanation. Apparently gender is not linked to sex or sexuality... so what is it?

 

And then you get to the part where it's phobic, as a heterosexual person, not to want to sleep with someone who has the same genitals as you. Basically, if you aren't attracted to a trans person, you're phobic. It's called genital discrimination or some such nonsense.

 

This whole scenario makes me think of 'How many lights' from 1984 - you can tell me there are 5, but I know deep down there are 4.

[The_DADDY]

15 minutes ago, leviathan13 said:

You say we need to get rid of all the boxes, but the trans community are the ones adding the extra boxes: millions of extra pronouns and genders. I've just come across a new one today: NOMAP - Non-Offending Minor Attracted Person; apparently there's a movement within the LGBTQABC123  community calling for, essentially, paedophiles to be allowed to have feelings for children and for the rest of the world to be OK with it because they're 'Non-Offending' i.e. not doing anything with their desire.

 

And the problem we now have is that, at the merest hint of tomboyish behaviour or a boy showing an interest in women's' clothes and make-up, the parents are quick to push them down the trans route. The last thing a 7yo needs is to be more confused about the world than they already are.

 

A person's lifestyle can have an effect on the wider population as we're seeing with the trans-women in women's sports and biological men being allowed in to female spaces: toilets/prisons/changing rooms etc. The issue with this is that you can't even question it as you will be labelled -phobic. It's basically become a religion that cannot be scrutinised.

 

To this day, beyond man/woman/male/female, no one can tell me what a 'gender' actually is. I get told it's how someone 'identifies', but that's not an explanation. If someone is gay, that's to do with who  they're attracted to - easy.  If someone transitions from one gender to the other and goes through the full change to live as the opposite gender because they were 'born in the wrong body' - I get that and understand it, to a point. But 70+ genders? Eh? I just cannot get it and no one has managed to give a satisfactory explanation. Apparently gender is not linked to sex or sexuality... so what is it?

 

And then you get to the part where it's phobic, as a heterosexual person, not to want to sleep with someone who has the same genitals as you. Basically, if you aren't attracted to a trans person, you're phobic. It's called genital discrimination or some such nonsense.

 

This whole scenario makes me think of 'How many lights' from 1984 - you can tell me there are 5, but I know deep down there are 4.

Bold.

Yep. Heard about that. Absolutely vile. They aren't NOMAP.

They are sick disgusting pedophiles who want to harm children to satisfy their twisted desires.

 

[Phanerothyme]

7 hours ago, leviathan13 said:

You say we need to get rid of all the boxes, but the trans community are the ones adding the extra boxes: millions of extra pronouns and genders. I've just come across a new one today: NOMAP - Non-Offending Minor Attracted Person; apparently there's a movement within the LGBTQABC123  community calling for, essentially, paedophiles to be allowed to have feelings for children and for the rest of the world to be OK with it because they're 'Non-Offending' i.e. not doing anything with their desire.

 

And the problem we now have is that, at the merest hint of tomboyish behaviour or a boy showing an interest in women's' clothes and make-up, the parents are quick to push them down the trans route. The last thing a 7yo needs is to be more confused about the world than they already are.

 

A person's lifestyle can have an effect on the wider population as we're seeing with the trans-women in women's sports and biological men being allowed in to female spaces: toilets/prisons/changing rooms etc. The issue with this is that you can't even question it as you will be labelled -phobic. It's basically become a religion that cannot be scrutinised.

 

To this day, beyond man/woman/male/female, no one can tell me what a 'gender' actually is. I get told it's how someone 'identifies', but that's not an explanation. If someone is gay, that's to do with who  they're attracted to - easy.  If someone transitions from one gender to the other and goes through the full change to live as the opposite gender because they were 'born in the wrong body' - I get that and understand it, to a point. But 70+ genders? Eh? I just cannot get it and no one has managed to give a satisfactory explanation. Apparently gender is not linked to sex or sexuality... so what is it?

 

And then you get to the part where it's phobic, as a heterosexual person, not to want to sleep with someone who has the same genitals as you. Basically, if you aren't attracted to a trans person, you're phobic. It's called genital discrimination or some such nonsense.

 

This whole scenario makes me think of 'How many lights' from 1984 - you can tell me there are 5, but I know deep down there are 4.

Jesus wept. "No one can tell me what a 'gender' actually is".

It's really not up to people to tell you. If it concerns you, find out about it. It's no-one else's responsibility but your own to educate yourself about gender, sex, attraction etc.

There's reputable science and good, well balanced writing on the subject and a long history of sexuality and gender too if you're willing to look.

 

That's a choice you can make.



 

[leviathan13]

6 hours ago, Phanerothyme said:

Jesus wept. "No one can tell me what a 'gender' actually is".

It's really not up to people to tell you. If it concerns you, find out about it. It's no-one else's responsibility but your own to educate yourself about gender, sex, attraction etc.

There's reputable science and good, well balanced writing on the subject and a long history of sexuality and gender too if you're willing to look.

 

That's a choice you can make.



 

Ah... the old "It's not my job to educate you" stance.

 

A quick Google search for what is gender mentions masculinity and femininity and that gender is a 'social construction' of traits that distinguish between them...

 

So, 2 genders and people identify as either, both or none... that's, arguably, 4 genders (although can 'non-binary' be classed as a gender? A bit like when religious people try to claim that atheism is still a religion) - where do the other 64+ genders come from and what are they?

[Guest makapaka]

17 hours ago, leviathan13 said:

You say we need to get rid of all the boxes, but the trans community are the ones adding the extra boxes: millions of extra pronouns and genders. I've just come across a new one today: NOMAP - Non-Offending Minor Attracted Person; apparently there's a movement within the LGBTQABC123  community calling for, essentially, paedophiles to be allowed to have feelings for children and for the rest of the world to be OK with it because they're 'Non-Offending' i.e. not doing anything with their desire.

 

And the problem we now have is that, at the merest hint of tomboyish behaviour or a boy showing an interest in women's' clothes and make-up, the parents are quick to push them down the trans route. The last thing a 7yo needs is to be more confused about the world than they already are.

 

A person's lifestyle can have an effect on the wider population as we're seeing with the trans-women in women's sports and biological men being allowed in to female spaces: toilets/prisons/changing rooms etc. The issue with this is that you can't even question it as you will be labelled -phobic. It's basically become a religion that cannot be scrutinised.

 

To this day, beyond man/woman/male/female, no one can tell me what a 'gender' actually is. I get told it's how someone 'identifies', but that's not an explanation. If someone is gay, that's to do with who  they're attracted to - easy.  If someone transitions from one gender to the other and goes through the full change to live as the opposite gender because they were 'born in the wrong body' - I get that and understand it, to a point. But 70+ genders? Eh? I just cannot get it and no one has managed to give a satisfactory explanation. Apparently gender is not linked to sex or sexuality... so what is it?

 

And then you get to the part where it's phobic, as a heterosexual person, not to want to sleep with someone who has the same genitals as you. Basically, if you aren't attracted to a trans person, you're phobic. It's called genital discrimination or some such nonsense.

 

This whole scenario makes me think of 'How many lights' from 1984 - you can tell me there are 5, but I know deep down there are 4.

Great post and completely on the money.

 

i just ignore it - it’s easier. A modern day nonsense.

Edited August 17, 2022 by makapaka

[sheffbag]

14 hours ago, Phanerothyme said:

Jesus wept. "No one can tell me what a 'gender' actually is".

It's really not up to people to tell you. If it concerns you, find out about it. It's no-one else's responsibility but your own to educate yourself about gender, sex, attraction etc.

There's reputable science and good, well balanced writing on the subject and a long history of sexuality and gender too if you're willing to look.

 

That's a choice you can make.



 

except it is if they are trying to enforce their "rights" on you and demand you make changes to accomodate them 

Edited August 17, 2022 by sheffbag

[Phanerothyme]

…

Edited August 17, 2022 by Phanerothyme
didn't write anything

[Phanerothyme]

12 hours ago, leviathan13 said:

Ah... the old "It's not my job to educate you" stance.

 

You say that as if it's a rhetorical device.

It's not a rhetorical device, it's my honestly held opinion - see what you can learn, you might be surprised at what you find.

 

But if the furthest you're willing to go in understanding a complex and difficult topic about people and how they feel is to skim read google results, then any discussion we're likely to have here is going to be unedifying and futile.

 

I'm no expert, or scholar - I don't have a radical or extremist view either IMO, but I have tried to get my head around the terminology and gain some insight into how trans people (in particular) experience the world, because it's important to me to understand - rather than take an immovable, extreme position and defend it.

Read around. It's sounds to me like you've been dwelling on the gender critical side of the debate, with a side order of manufactured culture war, and you've made up your mind - that's fine - it's not my job, nor an inviting prospect, to try and convince you any different.

I would only remind everyone that so-called normal common sense beliefs, as expressed in society today, do make other, different, people quite miserable.

And if they say that this is what's happening to them, it's not up to us to disbelieve them, but to see if its reasonable to change or even just tweak our 'common sense beliefs' so they are less miserable, and maybe even a bit happy.

That's where I'm starting from.

 

[leviathan13]

1 hour ago, Phanerothyme said:

You say that as if it's a rhetorical device.

It's not a rhetorical device, it's my honestly held opinion - see what you can learn, you might be surprised at what you find.

 

But if the furthest you're willing to go in understanding a complex and difficult topic about people and how they feel is to skim read google results, then any discussion we're likely to have here is going to be unedifying and futile.

 

I'm no expert, or scholar - I don't have a radical or extremist view either IMO, but I have tried to get my head around the terminology and gain some insight into how trans people (in particular) experience the world, because it's important to me to understand - rather than take an immovable, extreme position and defend it.

Read around. It's sounds to me like you've been dwelling on the gender critical side of the debate, with a side order of manufactured culture war, and you've made up your mind - that's fine - it's not my job, nor an inviting prospect, to try and convince you any different.

I would only remind everyone that so-called normal common sense beliefs, as expressed in society today, do make other, different, people quite miserable.

And if they say that this is what's happening to them, it's not up to us to disbelieve them, but to see if its reasonable to change or even just tweak our 'common sense beliefs' so they are less miserable, and maybe even a bit happy.

That's where I'm starting from.

 

So... do you know what a 'gender' is? Seeing as you've obviously read more than me.

[Phanerothyme]

17 hours ago, leviathan13 said:

So... do you know what a 'gender' is? Seeing as you've obviously read more than me.

I know how I choose to understand it, but I wouldn't want to insist it's the correct definition, or even that a correct definition exists tbh. Where people and their minds are concerned, I think its helpful to think of traits and characteristics (behavioural and physical, mental and apparent) are continua rather than categories.