QT: What do you really think about trans issues? Your opinion is often downvoted/drowned out by GC voices on this subreddit.
Submitted June 23, 2020, 3:25 p.m. by VerityFeminineA lot of posts on this subreddit usually have a couple of QT people saying that no, they don’t agree with XYZ despite trans rights activists and others on twitter claiming this or claiming that it’s transphobic not to believe XYZ.
In hindsight, it seems pretty stupid for me — I had an account in here with an old email — to believe that people open-minded and brave enough to come onto this mostly GC-dominated subreddit to argue their points, would support certain things that, say, Jessica Yaniv spouts — like transwomen can have periods.
A lot of this sub is dominated by GC, or people who are partly GC, so those who are QT don’t have much of a chance to express their opinion without being shouted down. I’ve got about ten questions below to ask you, and I hope you’ll answer.
1. How do you feel about children being given puberty blockers/hormones? Do you thing a child should be considered trans?
2. What’s your take on the whole male brain/female brain thing?
3. What do you think about female-only spaces?
4. What makes someone non-binary vs. being a gender non-conforming man/woman?
5. Do you think being trans is about the the body dysphoria (i.e wanting to have the body of the opposite sex) or gender as in roles/stereotypes and the patriarchy’s system of oppression?
6. How do you define gender? If defined differently than the above, how is this a more useful definition?
7. For those who agree with non-binary identities, why is having an infinite amount of genders preferable to none?
8. What do you think about the cotton ceiling?
9. What do you think about Rowling’s comments?
10. Women’s sports? Bathrooms/changing rooms?
11. Do you equate intersex with someone who has had SRS? Do you think a women that has had double mastectomies is less of a women because she no longer has her secondary sex characteristics?
12. What is gender identity or the feeling of being a woman/man besides body dysphoria if you think this is a thing?
13. Do you think that ‘TERFs’ are responsible for violence against trans people?
14. What do you think about the rate of suicide amongst trans people before and after transition?
15. How would you define woman? Preferably in a logically coherent, non circular way. Why is this a better definition than adult human female — which has functioned as the noun female people use to describe themselves and their oppression?
16. What do you think about the ‘trans murder epidemic’ and how it is being weaponised against people who disagree even slightly with queer theory on social media?
Thanks for answering, if you did. :)
Welcome to GCDebatesQT! Please remember to keep all top-level comments as indicated for the target audience. Comments from users outside the target audience will be removed.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Well I don't see myself as either so,
1. I disagree with medical transition for children. Something like 80% percent of kids with dysphoria recover. Even supposed neutral medication like blockers can have long-term effects, especially when taken over a long time period. This is regardless of the reason that they are being taken (i.e. cancer treatment vs HRT). I've seen people try to claim that they are perfectly harmless when used in kids, which isn't true. I do support social transition as in using whatever name/pronoun and wearing whatever clothing bc this is pretty harmless.
2. Mostly BS. Are there behavioral differences or trends between the sexes based on biology? Almost certainly (it would be strange if there weren't as this is seen in almost every other species). Even if gender roles were abolished there would likely be something careers, etc that would be more common among women. But these differences aren't like a switch. Brains are complicated. Simplifying them down to male vs female seems reductive.
3. Yes. Female only spaces are 100% valid. As are male only spaces and trans only spaces.
4. I am not sure
5. Body dysphoria for some people and sex stereotypes for others. Like for some trans people body dysphoria is their main reason for transitioning and for others it isn't.
6. Sex-based socialization & roles & I'm honestly not sure.
7. No idea
8. Not sure what that is
9. Not a big deal. She never said that she hated anyone or wished anyone harm yet people sent her violent threats. Disagreeing with popular discourse =/= hate.
10. Women's sports should be biological women. Women's restrooms, I don't care as long as you aren't behaving inappropriately. You are typically in a locked stall alone anyways.
11. No. Intersex disorders are different than elective SRS. Women who've had mastectomies and hysterectomies are still women. The fact that they are female hasn't gone away nor has their female socialization.
12. I don't know
13. No, that's mostly men.
14. Its too high and its sad. Its clear that people with body dysphoria need medical help and current therapies aren't working as well as many activists claim they are.
15. An adult human female, including XY intersex people who were socialized as girls (i.e. Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome).
16. Murder is bad, but I don't think anyone involved in this discourse is contributing to it. Tweeting angry messages to women online won't help anything. Help transwomen who are trapped in dangerous situations (i.e. sex work or abusive families) escape.
Thanks so much for replying. The cotton ceiling thing is about lesbians having sex with transwomen, and whether or not it is transphobic to refuse. :)
Ugh yeah I've heard this. Refusing sex with a trans person isn't transphobic. Whatever happened to 'no means no'? This is just incel behavior in another costume.
I will answer but please note that I can only speak for myself. I would also prefer if possible that any responses only focus on one or two points at a time so as to make discussion easier.
1. I think it's complicated. I think that social transition is appropriate at any age and medical transition may be appropriate for some children. The goal always has to be to take the path that will cause the least long term harm to the individual. Personally I transitioned as an adult and don't think that having transitioned as a child would particularly have been better for me, for one thing it would have left me infertile, which I am glad is not true today. I am sure that there are some situations however where early medical intervention is the right way forward and I would leave it to the medical professionals to judge when this is the case.
2. I have seen studies showing a link between certain attributes of the brain and gender and I believe that these links exist. I do not believe that there is such a thing as a male or a female brain. What these studies describe are general patterns with overlap and it is not possible to look at someones brain and know what gender or even what sex they are.
3. I assume that you are using female to mean not inclusive of trans women? I believe that there are times when it is appropriate for such spaces to exist, I do not believe that common gendered spaces such as bathrooms and locker rooms need to be segregated by sex.
4. Well for one thing non binary person may not appear to be gender non conforming as there is not necessarily any link between how a person presents and acts and their identity. A gender non conforming woman/man is someone who considers themselves a woman/man but does not conform to particular gender stereotypes. A non binary person does not consider themselves a man/woman, and may conform or not conform to any gender roles.
5. I don't consider my own transition to be to do with wanting the body of the opposite sex. On the whole I like my body. It is to do with societal gender roles and expectations. Like it or not we are all expected to fit into these roles to at least some extent, and not doing so can be miserable and isolating. In a perfect world such expectations would not exist, but a step in the right direction is to allow people choose which social role they occupy rather than having it be predicated from birth.
6. Gender as an overarching concept is the social roles and expectations associated with men and women in our society. A person's gender is how their identity fits or does not fit into these roles. Of course, no person is going to get close to fitting any social role perfectly, but there are degrees to how easy it is to live with a particular expectation that will vary from person to person.
7. It's not. Infinite is essentially equivalent to none, the more different identies we recognise the more we are actually recognising individuals rather than fitting people into predefined categories. Once you get to the point where you recognise that everyone is different (I.e. Infinite genders) you have in effect eliminated those categories altogether.
8. I think that no one should feel obligated to sleep with or date another person for any reason.
9. I think that a lot of what she says is responding to straw man points that trans people do not generally agree with. To me this makes her come across as poorly educated on the subject. I also worry that her doing this to a wide audience will only help to spread such misconceptions.
10. Don't care either way about sports. Plenty of people are excluded from professional sports for any number of reasons. If trans people can't compete so be it. I want everyone to feel safe in bathrooms and changing rooms but so far have not seen any evidence that allowing use of these space to be dictated by gender identity would reduce safety.
11. No and no
...and I've run out of steam, this is my stop.
Do you believe they need to be segregated at all? If so, why?
I personally would not mind if they were not segregated at all, but I recognise that some people have concerns about the safety of such an arrangement, which are valid. I do know however that in the US bathroom stalls are not very secure and it is possible to peak into them through cracks around the door, so maybe that's a factor in this?
Thank you for answering. I really appreciate it. :)
In response to number 4 then, what would you say non-binary means then? What does it mean to identify as something other than man/women? What requirements does it have? (To clarify, I meant not just presenting in a gender non-conforming way but acting too.)
And in response to number 6, don’t you think that by transitioning and treating these roles as what means to be a man/woman, these roles are given legitimacy? Wouldn’t a world with no such genders be far better, because gender roles/expectations are sexist and disadvantage women?
Once again, thanks for answering. In case you feel like it, I’m very interested in your response to question 15. Hope you reply! :)
I would say that a non binary person is someone who is not comfortable being classed as either a man or a woman.
To go into a bit more detail I guess I'd say that when someone describes someone as a woman for example, even if that individual is using that word to mean "adult human female" it is not possible to separate their intended meaning from the connotations that the society we live in attaches to the word. Further to this, anyone who chooses to refer to themselves as a woman has to, to some extent, accept that by doing so they are giving permission for other people to associate whatever associations they have with that word with them. Of course, as a society we understand that women are not stereotypes and no one reasonably expects that any particular woman will fit all of the gendered expectations that are associated with the word. If a majority of those associations are in fact the opposite of how you perceive yourself however, using the word can feel like a lie.
I do not believe that transitioning gives gender roles legitimacy, but yes, it would be much better if we could live in a world with no such gendered expectations. That is the world I hope we can work towards, but it's not possible to just click our fingers and make that the case today. Since we can't do that it is necessary for people to find ways to make the current system work for them where possible and those people should be supported. They are victims of a bad system and until it has been dismantled they are going to have to do what they can.
Edit: as for question 15, a woman is someone who is comfortable being identified with the social role that has been defined for women in our society. I disagree that anyone in practice uses the word woman to refer to sex outside of a few specific contexts. If they did I feel like the word wouldn't be in as common usage as is the case because a person's sex just isn't relevant in most conversations.
This view is making me so sad. How do you think women won the right to vote? They knew they couldn't click their fingers and change society. They knew they had to fight and CHALLENGE social norms and the law. Instead you are arguing that people who don't meet society's sexist expectations should transition in order to meet society's rigid social norms for male and female behaviour. Imagine if the women who wanted the right to vote or to work had said 'i guess society won't change, so we will call ourselves 'men', and that will fix the problem!' ???!
Absolutely not. I think that people should transition if doing so is going to be long term beneficial to their happiness and mental health.
What good would I have done for the goal of challenging gendered society if I had not been able to transition? I would not have been able to be a person who can challenge injustice where I see it, I might not have been here at all. The most I could have possibly contributed would have been to be an example of a gender nonconforming person, and I still am that.
I resent the implication that my transition is an act of support for gendered society or means that I can't or won't challenge gendered society.
I definitely don't think your AIM is to reinforce sexist norms. But I do think that a clear by-product of this perspective is that it does perpetuate sexist norms. The more we effectively tell girls 'if society hates you for not confirming to feminine behaviours, there is a get out clause: identify as a man', the more we rigidly enforce gender norms. Like that news story of the boy at the conservative school last week with long hair: he was told his long hair was only acceptable if he identified as a girl. This shows how conservatives are totally accepting trans ideology because it so neatly reinforces gender norms. Again, I'm not saying that was your intention, I'm just saying that is the result. Same as JK using a gender neutral name to publish her books, because she and her publishers understand they live in a sexist society. I don't think their AIM was to perpetuate the view that women can't write or can't be read by boys, but indeed it's an unfortunate fact that the more women hide behind neutral or male nom de plumes, the more this serves to perpetuate the invisibility of women in culture.
I am very happy for you that transitioning helped you. You're obviously a smart person who has the capacity to think critically. I hope you can think long term about the kind of society you want to live in and you want your children to live in, when it comes to sexism. I think one of my big drivers is that I don't want my children to feel pressured to change their bodies in order to be who they are: I want my children to have the permission to have the jobs and hobbies and interests and mannerisms that they have, irrespective of whether that corresponds to what is traditionally expected of their sex, and not have to undergo surgery and hormones just because they don't fit the mold. That's the society I'm hoping for, and that's why I'm actively trying to challenge the narrative you're arguing for. Hope you can understand that.
Also, it's important to me that our society doesn't become anti-science. People not understand human biology and what man and woman mean falls in the same category as anti-vaxxers and flat earthers, it's just a denial of science, and that is pretty dangerous.
Thank you for you reply!
Jesus Christ, what?
Do you object to something about what I said?
Trans people are so desperately concerned with what other people think. It's amazing that any of you are able to get through the day without repeated meltdowns over strangers looking at you crossways.
People will "associate whatever associations" they have with all kinds of words about you, including transman and there's nothing you can do to stop them. Lmao, that you think it's about giving or withholding permission! You imagine that you can control others' interior reflections? How young and/or how egocentric!
To paraphrase u/feminismwritings, Fuck society's sexist norms and fuck other people's sexist associations. I live how I want.
Thanks for answering. I'm most concerned by your answer to number 5. It seems tragic and regressive to me to simply accept sexist social roles/norms and transition because you don't conform to those sexist norms. It makes a lot more sense to me to simply say 'fuck society's sexist norms' and live how you want. That's how women got the rights they did in Europe, for example: they didn't say 'oh, sexist norms demand that we don't vote and dont own property, we will just say we're men so that we can vote and own property'. No, they fought to change society and change those laws and norms. It seems so regressive and sad that people like you are doing the opposite: instead of fighting for society to accept different norms, you are just capitulating and perpetuating harmful sexist social norms. Don't you think?
I so want you to free yourself of that sexism and just act however you want, irrespective of your sex. That's what I do. I am a woman and I won't capitulate to sexist social norms for how women ought to behave, I want to fight and push back against them. The only way to do that is to say 'im a woman and women can do anything, including these traditionally 'masculine' things.
I would say that I did say "fuck society's sexist norms". It is a societal norm that men have penises and women have vaginas and I'm certainly subverting that.
I do not believe that my decision to transition was in any way motivated by trying to conform to society's expectations of gender. I was gender non conforming before I transitioned and I still am now. My motivation was entirely to do with preserving my own happiness and mental health.
But I'm confused: you said you DIDN'T transition because you hated your body or wanted to change it. You said you transitioned because you didn't fit social norms. Social norms are things that are arbitrarily constructed: like 'women prefer chatting and shopping, men prefer competing and woodwork'. Those are just nonsense, arbitrary social norms which we can change.
Men having penises is not a societal 'norm', it's just a factual reality. Language conveys meaning: we call the ones with the penises men and the ones with the vaginas women. Like how we call the chickens with one type of reproductive organs 'roosters' and the ones with the other type of reproductive organs 'hens'. That's not an arbitrary social convention: that's because we need words to describe different categories of things accurately!
Yes, and I didn't change my body, hence not fitting the norm of men having penises and women vaginas.
I didn't transition because I wanted to fit social norms, I transitioned because society I live in is not built to allow for people who fail to fit those norms in the way that I do. Changing society is of course the ultimate goal, but since I do not have the ability to make that change myself, transition was the only option to preserve my mental health.
I still want to try to dismantle gender roles as much as possible where I see them, and transition has allowed me to continue to work towards that goal. I would not have been able to do so if my energy was completely taken up with dealing with the impossibility of living as I did pre transition. Hell, without transition I might not even have been here to continue doing that.
And yes, the idea that men have penises and women have vaginas is entirely an arbitrary social convention. "Man" and "woman" refer to social roles, not biology, and there's no reason that the two should be linked.
Ok. I can kindof see what you mean: you mean being gender non-conforming was so upsetting (because society is SO sexist, which I agree it is), that it was easier from a mental health perspective to look like the sex that society believes better corresponds to how you want to behave. I agree completely that society is very sexist. This is exactly how they've dealt with that sexism in Iran: gay men (i.e. very non-conforming men, by Iranian social standards) are often forced to transition to being women (with the support of the Iranian government). So you're basically taking a similar strategy as the Iranian government I guess.
I strongly disagree with your last point. Man and woman do not refer to social roles. We are animals, and like all animals we need words to refer to the adult male and adult female of our species. In the same way that in chickens you have hens and roosters, we have men and women. Pretty simple.
If we didn't have those words ('man' and 'woman'), we'd just have to invent them again! Because the human species happens to be dimorphic: i.e. like cats and dogs we come in two sexes, male and female. We aren't special, we can't identify out of our biology any more than a hen could identify out of laying eggs.
Re #3 do you believe that a male who identifies as a woman but has not medically transitioned at all should be able to go in a woman’s locker room? To put it another way, should girls and women be changing and showering next to surprise penis?
Yes on principle but in practice I can't imagine any pre transition trans woman being comfortable being naked in front of strangers
How do we determine who is a pre-op trans woman and who is a man? I’m honestly asking. I very much agree with you that pre op trans women would not be comfortable naked in front of women and girls. But you know who IS comfortable getting naked around women and girls? Creepy ass dudes. And the world is full of them. So if our sole criteria for entry into the women’s locker room is that you must state “I identify as a woman”, then we are no longer segregating by sex at all.
Personally I don't see the need to segregate by sex. My answer however would be that, regardless of someones sex, if they are behaving inappropriately they should be removed. If they are not behaving inappropriately then I don't see that there's an issue.
What is inappropriate behavior? Touching somebody? Touching yourself? Staring? Stealing quick glances?
99% of girls and women do not want to shower and get dressed in open view of a random man. THEY feel the need to segregate by sex and they deserve to do so. The beautiful thing about having a women’s room is that if a man walks in, that itself is inappropriate.
It’s wrong to say “even though you all feel safer without men, in the interest of fairness and inclusivity we are going to take that away from you. If you want to use these facilities, you will have to be change with strangers of the opposite sex.” And to enshrine it in law? Nah.
Hey, since we are all just labeled by body parts now, why not have a penis changing room and a no-penis changing room? That would solve the majority of my objection.
these were great questions!
1. hormones should not be available until they’re in their late teens, regardless of whether or not they have parental consent. i’m kind of torn on blockers. on one hand, it seems dangerous to be giving kids around middle school age anything that interferes with their natural development. on the other hand, going through puberty as a trans person is an incredibly traumatic experience that causes many of us to develop self-destructive habits and seem to dissociate from our bodies. i’d love to be able to spare someone that emotional pain, if it seemed safe. so i’m undecided on that.
2. i’d like to see more studies done on this topic. i hear lots of conflicting evidence. personally i wouldn’t be surprised at all if there really are some noticeable differences between male and female brains. though, i do agree with another poster who said it seems reductive to categorize brains as male vs female when there’s so many other sources of difference.
3. i’m sure there are situations where it makes sense for spaces to be female-only. bathrooms aren’t one of them, in my opinion. but, yes, i’m sure there are some.
4. i don’t identify as nonbinary myself so i’m gonna leave this one alone.
5. for me, it was almost entirely about body dysphoria. i was also uncomfortable with some gender roles and stereotypes, but this pushed me towards androgyny as a style and my belief in the importance of undoing some of the whole socializing mess much more than it made me question if i might be trans.
6. roles/stereotypes/system of oppression sounds about right
7. i do accept nonbinary people but do not advocate for an “infinite” amount of genders, especially legally. the way i see it, nonbinary is an umbrella term that encompasses everyone who identifies outside of the terms man and woman. if people want to use other, more specific words for their experience, that’s fine with me, but i still consider them under the nonbinary umbrella.
8. everyone is attracted to who they’re attracted to. it’s natural; it’s innate; we can’t control it. i understand, knowing how dysphoria feels, why some trans individuals are hurt by overarching statements made on social media. dysphoria flares up when we’re reminded of certain parts of our biology; that’s just how dysphoria works. that being said, i DON’T understand the urge to change the minds of people who have those preferences... if someone doesn’t want to be with me because i’m trans, that’s entirely up to them. i understand and respect it. and if someone doesn’t want to be with me exactly as i am— trans, among other things— then why in the world would i want to be with them anyway? there are plenty of people out there who include trans people in their dating pool. everyone deserves to find love and intimacy, if they want it, exactly as they are with exactly the type of person they’d like to be with.
9. i read everything she said a while ago and honestly forget most of it
10. people should be able to use the restroom for the gender they identify with, but trans people should exercise good judgement and go into the restroom for the gender they pass as (for their sake and others’). i’m also a big advocate for family/gender neutral restrooms. i feel similarly about locker rooms. good judgement is the key, and it’s hard not to be situational. no one would want a fully passing ftm guy in a women’s locker room. no one would want a ftm guy who doesn’t pass at all in a men’s locker room. for everyone involved’s safety and comfort. people should go where they fit most and where they will be safe. no idea with sports.
11. no and no
12. i’d say it’s mostly dysphoria.
13. i wouldn’t make that claim. i do believe that the people given that label often make comments that are damaging to trans individuals or the trans community as a whole. but i don’t think the majority of them are advocating for actual violence...
14. i’ve seen conflicting statistics recently
15. going to skip this one for the same reason i skipped the nonbinary questions. interested to see what others say though!
16. violence against any group of people is horrible. i don’t have any problem with people bringing up murder statistics in debates because they’re relevant facts. but i also agree with what another poster said about that not really fixing anything. most people involved in these kinds of discussions are aware of those statistics anyway.
Thanks for your answers. I really appreciate it. :) I guess a lot of people have differing views on this subreddit, from what I’ve seen.
Given that you define gender as something oppressive, don’t you think scrapping gender instead of creating more genders (serving to legitimise gender) would be better? Or do you think it isn’t currently viable or something?
Looking forward to you response. :)
i support “scrapping gender” in theory. i definitely don’t think it’s going to happen anytime soon, if ever. but breaking down genders roles and stereotypes in little ways, making progress towards eventually getting rid of the concept as a whole? yeah, i’m totally behind that. i’m assuming the “creating new genders” thing is about nonbinary people, and i’m not gonna comment too much on that.. i’m not nonbinary myself, so i don’t understand their experience. though for what it’s worth, plenty of nonbinary people i’ve talked to would feel perfectly comfortable in a world with less gender roles/stereotypes or one where gender didn’t exist at all. i’m not sure that the two sides of this debate’s end goals differ quite as much as people seem to think sometimes (at least the reasonable people on each side. of course there are people in any movement who take things too far).
1. If someone is trans, than earlier transition should give them better results. But if someone isn't trans, then no. I think it might help to work out ways for teens to figure out if they're trans, and start on lower trial doses, rather than on blockers.
2. I take it as a shorthand for some hypothetical neurological causes, involving as-yet-unidentified parts of the brain. P.S. Not all neurological causes would qualify, I posted about that in response to https://www.reddit.com/r/GCdebatesQT/comments/he2vq9/qt_if_gender_dysphoria_turns_out_to_be_due_to_a/
3. I don't think there's a 1-size-fits-all solution. I would like it if most women's spaces included trans women, but some such as sports may want to exclude trans women, set transition requirements, etc. Preferably without erasing anyone's lived experiences.
4. I don't think it should be about conformity or non-conformity. You can be non-binary while conforming to one set of roles, or vice-versa. I think it's an appropriate label for people who would prefer mixed or intermediate sexual characteristics, especially if they can rule out social pressures, trauma, beauty standards, and so on as sources for these preferences. Does that make non-op people non-binary? Maybe, not my call.
5. Changing our bodies, not necessarily changing our identity markers and/or social roles
6. A system of identity markers and/or social roles assigned to each sex, usually enforced and usually creating a hierarchy. I think identity markers are more or less inevitable, as people try to find romance and/or sex, but the social roles should be loosened or abolished, and the enforcement and the hierarchy should be abolished.
7. I think they help people describe their experiences.
8. Someone may be exclusively or almost-exclusively attracted to women because of scent, or body shape, or genitals, or socialization, or maybe there really are certain personality traits among some women and not among men. I guess that's the "Venn diagram model" of sexual orientation? Now you may not want to invite trans women into these spaces, but please don't exclude those who are attracted to trans women.
9. I haven't followed here. Twitter gives me migraines.
10. I guess it'll take some fine-tuning so that trans women don't have an unfair advantage in some sports. I think we need some safe bathrooms, and refitting everything with unisex ones isn't practical. In the meantime, finding ways to improve privacy, stop hidden cameras, etc. should help.
11. No. No.
12. It depends where the dysphoria comes from, and what makes it better or worse. If it comes from social pressures, then medical transition won't help in the long run, and gender liberation if not abolition would help more.
13. I don't know. There are a number of claims involved, including that some trans-critical feminists provide ideological cover for those who do attack trans women, that the Gorgons made death threats against Sandy Stone, that gender-critical radfems have contributed to SESTA/FOSTA and other policies which expose trans sex workers to more violence, and that gender-critical radfems contributed to the exclusion of trans coverage from Medicaid and Medicare about 1980, costing an estimate 50,000 lives due to increased suicide rates. Like how am I supposed to evaluate some of these claims? It's worth noting that gender-critical radfems supported both sides in the recent supreme court case-- WOLF on one side, Cathy Brennan on the other-- so uh, providing ideological cover for both sides?
14. I don't know. Intuitively, dysphoria would probably make it worse, seeing transition as a real option would probably make it better while people try that, and then blocking transitin and/or bad results and/or social harassment around it would make it worse again.
15. I don't know, I'm sick of definitions. I think in the context of "should I transition?" we need to figure out when people should or shouldn't.
16. We need better data.
Thank you for answering. I won’t try to argue against all of your points, but I’m interested particularly in your answer to question 4. How would you define non-binary then? :)
People who would prefer mixed-enough or intermediate-enough sexual characteristics. I'd prefer typically non-trans female ones so it's not my place to try to draw a line between either binary and non-binary.
Please define "better results". Be specific. Thank you.
1st, relieving or at least lightening dysphoria sooner.
2nd, not leaving as many scars from the wrong hormonal environment.
I'm not exactly QT anymore, but I used to be before I detransitioned, and the questions seemed interesting so I answered them in a way that I think reflects my opinions when I was still transitioning.
1. I have never heard of a case of a child being given HRT, that would make zero sense. Childen (and everyone else obv) should be able to present however they want though. Blockers should honestly never be given to anyone, they're terrible. Teenagers should be able to get hormones, if they have had appropriate counseling/therapy, and are old enough (imo 16 is a reasonable age).
2. Brains certainly are sexually dimorphic, and there is evidence for biological behavioural differences between the sexes. I don't think this has really has anything to do with gender dypshoria though.
3. I support freedom of association, so yeah no problem with female only spaces. Things do get more complicated when we are talking about public resources, as it then becomes a zero sum game. I think for public facilities that are sex-segregated, such as bathrooms, a pragmatic approach is the best (so no dicks in spaces where you can reasonably expect to not see any). I am generally against sex-segregated spaces if there is no biological basis though, so e.g. I am against male/female-only public schools, because that's sex discrimination/unfair allocation of a significant amount of public resources.
4. Having gender dysphoria.
5. It's about both body dysphoria and gender as in roles/stereotypes, and I don't think those can be fully seperated.
6. Gender is what I would call a "socio-biological" role based on sex, and I think this is the most meaningful definition, as it is what is actually relevant in real life.
7. Having an infinite amount of genders is clearly infeasible. Having a third "other" gender I think is useful though, for people who experience significant distress with the gender corresponding to their sex.
8. People can date whoever they want.
9. I agree with some of the things she said, disagree with others. The backlash she has gotten is pretty ridicolous, but tbh that's kinda her own fault for talking about identity politics on twitter. It's basically inevitable to eventually be cancelled for not being woke enough if you engage with twitter ideologues.
10. Professional sports should be sex-segregated, trans people can still do casual sports. As for bathrooms, see 3.
11. Intersex is a different thing than being trans.
12. It's self-perception based on the relation to gender.
13. No, not in general.
14. Hard to say honestly, as it has been so politicized. Trans people should definitely receive better care though, my experience with trans health care could have been a lot better.
15. Woman is the gender corresponding to the female sex.
16. Activists for all sorts of causes (including trans and GC) love to use murders as political tools to appeal to emotions. I think this is complete bs, murder rates, especially those motivated by hate are generally very low, especially in the west and pretty much insignificant to other causes of death.
Being murdered because you happen to be a certain way in a society that sees you as lesser and worthy of contempt is different from just slipping on a bar of soap in a bathtub. Murders are focused on because they are a horrific culmination of bigotry that individuals face every day due to their marginalised status.
Also for women, literally half of all murdered women are murdered by their male partner. It's a ridiculously high number.
Here in the U.S., the men in power don't consider M on F violence a hate crime. Shocking, I know. It would be be radical and transformative if they did, and heck, we can't buy birth control unless a certain political party controls the Presidency and the Supreme Court. But there you have it.
Is it considered a hate crime in your country? More importantly, do you know whether the U.N. considers it one? I think so, but not positive.
From what I have found, sex does not seem to be a category that is considered for hate crimes in most countries, and not in the U.N either.
People have definitely considered it though (such as here), but it seems like in practice, adding sex as a category would mostly just be a symbolic act. As far as I have understood, most of the times when men comment violent crimes with female victims, in particular their partners, it isn't due to hatred of women but rather for pragmatic reasons such as power and control.
You're making an incredibly trite and superficial argument, and making it, it sounds, based on a lack of familiarity with the subject. You do understand that one of the rules of the sub is that you must have a basic understanding of feminism, correct? Please go get that understanding.
Men don't rape infant girls to death to prove to those infants who's more powerful. They don't rape and kill toddlers and tweens to show them men are in control. And they don't rape, beat and strangle their girlfriends and wives out of love.
Men don't see women as fully human. We a convenience until we act like we have minds and wills of our own. Many men cannot handle that. They hate it and they hate us. Look at the state of girls and women in the world and look at the history of men's treatment of girls and women, and stop pretending otherwise, see no evil monkey.
Edited: last sentence
I do have a decent understanding of feminism (though of course I may not necessarily agree with all feminist ideas), the part that you quoted I read in the article that I linked, which was authored by feminists.
No but they sometimes do threaten/intimidate/beat/kill/rape women, in particular their partners, to make them do whatever they want (do all the housework, have sex with them whenever they want, shut up about their problems, etc.), i.e. to _control_ them and assert _power_.
When I look at the world and its history, I see that male violence targets other men as well, in fact overwhelmingly so (consider wars for example). The men who commit violence do so quite indiscriminately. When they do it against women it isn't because they specifically hate women, these men have no respect for other men either. They just do it because they _can_, and because it _benefits_ them. Violent men also typically commit a lot more property crimes and crimes against animals, they have no respect for others.
Sure, homicide is different than other causes of death, I shouldn't have included that. However, my point still stands. In the EU, about 0.95 in every 100'000 people were killed in 2018, the probability of being killed is basically zero. Furthermore, only a small fraction of those homicides are actually hate crimes, i.e. commited due to bigotry. Most homicides are commited for other reasons, e.g. money, organized crime, etc.
Women are killed at a significantly _lower_ rate than men (they account for about 20 % of homicide victims), in particular when the perpetrators are strangers. That is why half of women who are killed are killed by their male partners, because the chance of being killed by someone who _isn't_ their partner is so much lower for women than for men (and also the partners of men are typically women, who commit far less violent crimes in general, so the effect doesn't appear in the reverse direction).
Of course, that isn't to say that being killed isn't a big deal, murder is a horrible crime, and the perpetrators should spend their life in prison. But statistically speaking, homicides just really aren't that relevant to your life if you live in the west (which I am assuming here as that is where most redditors live). By far the most likely person to kill a westerner is that person themselves.
Lmao. You were so busy mansplaining you missed the point entirely. HOMICIDE IS RELEVANT TO YOUR LIFE IF YOU ARE A WOMAN IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH A MAN.
The problem is particularly acute if the girl/woman is pregnant. Murder is the #1 cause of death for a pregnant woman in the U.S. after car accidents. Suicide due to DV is #2. Medical causes follow.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3428236/
I just showed in my last comment that the chance of a woman being killed by her male partner in the EU is _one in a million_. How is something that rare relevant to life? I certainly don't worry about being killed and I have a bigger chance than that.
There are men who kill the mother of their own child?? Damn that's fucked up.
It's not about murder being as likely as getting hit by a car, it's about the fact that normalised hatred and bigotry towards a certain group can get to such an extreme that it can result in murder, and this affects the lives of marginalised groups who need to take care of their safety in order to avoid being the targets of discrimination, violence and murder at the hands of men (and it's almost always men) who hate them. Men are shit and most get murdered by men who are shit like them. This is different from people getting murdered merely for existing as someone who isn't a straight white man. Being murdered specifically for being a man is not an issue, meanwhile for women and other vulnerable groups, they need to adapt their lives to the threat of men preying on them, and have multiple experiences with dangerous men as reminders. In fact, if they don't protect themselves enough this always gets used to blame them and call them naive idiots for acting like they could possibly be safe around men, by the same garbage human beings who will whine about men being "generalised" for being violent bigots.
Because, as you yourself said it, most homicides are committed by men on other men due to organised crimes, gang violence, drug and alcohol abuse etc. (i.e. shitty men kill other shitty men), not because men are gentlemen who would never think of targeting women. Men encourage dangerous and psycho behaviour and at the same time believe they're immortal and owed everything by everyone else because they're privileged and can't even comprehend being targeted and subjugated due to their sex. This is entirely different from women being actively preyed on because they are women, because men think women are their property who have no humanity of their own and exist only for men to make use of them. Big difference there.
So instead of seeing women not preying on men as just lulz gurls bein' gurls, how about you ask some questions about why men think women are worthy of violence and subjugation? Or is that just not liberal enough for you?
I know that marginalized groups are targets for discrimination (I mean I was beaten up a couple of times myself as a kid for being weak, autistic and GNC), and I certainly support anti-discrimination laws, and getting justice for violent criminals (unfortunately a decent amount of people are somehow anti law enforcement nowadays). I just don't like it when activists pretend there is some kind of "murder epidemic", or that hate crimes are common in the west, they just aren't. And that's a good thing!
I don't think the type of man who commits violent crimes has a concept of "worthiness" for other people.
??? I mean I am somewhat liberal politically, but I don't see how that is relevant here?
I’m GC, I’d be down with a no penis rule for a lot of places.
I'm curious, what places do you mean specifically?
Anywhere with the expectation of privacy and/or nudity - changing rooms, etc.
I think it should be a prerequisite for being housed in women’s prisons.
Ah ok, yeah I definitely agree with that.
OK, here goes:
1. How do you feel about children being given puberty blockers/hormones? Do you thing a child should be considered trans? In extreme cases, yes, once all other options have been exhausted. See: Sam Moehlig, Emily Tressa.
2. What’s your take on the whole male brain/female brain thing? That if it’s real (and I’m inclined to believe it is), it applies to a very limited part of the brain and has to do more with proprioception and things like that, not with cognitive abilities or personality traits. More on this here.
3. What do you think about female-only spaces? If I’m being very blunt, my gut reaction is one of strong aversion similar to that of ethno-nationalists claiming they’re entitled to ethnostates. But that’s just a gut reaction. In practice, I’ve never lived as a female so I can’t really say, but I’ve heard conflicting views on this; recently I found a thread by u/HolographicPriestess that really clarified the GC position on this, but when I asked (natal) women I personally knew they said they were not troubled at all by trans women’s presence there, and one of them said that women often harass other women just the same, except they mask it as a ‘compliment’ on the other woman’s body. Also, see the part about the restaurant in Prague in the link in #2.
4. What makes someone non-binary vs. being a gender non-conforming man/woman? Again, the proprioception thing, but also a strong gut aversion towards being classified as either. I’ve certainly felt this way about being labelled a ‘man’ my entire life.
5. Do you think being trans is about the the body dysphoria (i.e wanting to have the body of the opposite sex) or gender as in roles/stereotypes and the patriarchy’s system of oppression? I commented on this here. Short(er) answer: it’s a mix. Also, I think there’s a certain amount of correlation between different aspects of gender, but only to a degree—hence the often poorly-worded account of trans people discovering their transness through certain stereotypical interests and the detransitioner who realizes they weren’t trans all along. At any rate, I know from experience that trans people are more diverse in their gender expression and personality than GC tends to give them credit for.
6. How do you define gender? If defined differently than the above, how is this a more useful definition? See the links provided in #2, #5 above.
7. For those who agree with non-binary identities, why is having an infinite amount of genders preferable to none? I used to be more of an ‘abolish gender’ type myself until I realized that it’s an important identification marker for some people. Two things that really changed my mind was a meme on r/egg_irl in which OP said that being raised ‘gender-neutral’ just made it harder to realize they were trans (don’t remember in which direction), and a comment on a thread I’d made once (I think) by a transgender bilingual Russian–Finnish speaker who said that being addressed gender-neutrally in Finnish made her feel neutral but being addressed as female in Russian made her feel ‘at home’. I wish I’d saved the links, though.
8. What do you think about the cotton ceiling? I think it’s hugely misunderstood. No-one but the creepiest of trans people would say you were a transphobe just because of a certain preference, but they would wonder if it’s because you think trans people are ‘less than’ in some way. More on this here.
9. What do you think about Rowling’s comments? Rooted in a lot of ignorance and fearmongering, as elaborated on here. Also the part about ‘sex is real’ is extremely manipulative: the way people reacted to this statement is similar to how people reacted to ‘it’s OK to be white’—namely, they inferred a more sinister implication of the fact that the person saying them bothered to say so explicitly. I should probably write a proper post on that.
10. Women’s sports? Bathrooms/changing rooms? See link in #2. Short answer: individual stalls for all, and separating athletes based not on sex or gender but rather, say, an overall score calculating navel position, waist-to-shoulders ratio, Q angle, testosterone/oestrogen levels, etc., kind-of like they do with weight classes in boxing and wrestling. All in all, I’m not a fan of segregation based on gender, sex, race, or any other characteristic unless I see an unavoidable need to do so.
11. Do you equate intersex with someone who has had SRS? Do you think a women that has had double mastectomies is less of a women because she no longer has her secondary sex characteristics? Intersex is a natal condition, so no.
12. What is gender identity or the feeling of being a woman/man besides body dysphoria if you think this is a thing? I personally put way more weight on the body dysphoria thing, but anyway, see first link in #5.
13. Do you think that ‘TERFs’ are responsible for violence against trans people? It’s hard to say because they’re generally a fairly minor group and are hard to tell apart from run-of-the-mill natal women who commit violence against them. Plus, to their credit, their mean-spirited rhetoric tends to stay just that: rhetoric. I’m gonna say it’s an overall no, but that’s mostly erring on the side of caution.
14. What do you think about the rate of suicide amongst trans people before and after transition? That I wish there were a better way to stop their dysphoria than going through years of this arduous and fairly risky medical process, which doesn’t even get ‘full results’. But I’m glad they at least have that, and that it seems to work wonders for most of them.
15. How would you define woman? Preferably in a logically coherent, non circular way. Why is this a better definition than adult human female — which has functioned as the noun female people use to describe themselves and their oppression? Preferably in terms of neurology, and it’s better because it applies to everyone who would ultimately find it fitting. Also, as r/GenderDifficult acknowledges, trans women experience some of it themselves, and trans men no longer do, once they’re far enough into their transition.
16. What do you think about the ‘trans murder epidemic’ and how it is being weaponised against people who disagree even slightly with queer theory on social media? The fear informing it is real, but it does feel manipulative. But so is the way this question is phrased, because it’s a wild exaggeration: I’ve had my fair share of disagreements with the more ‘radical’ faction of trans people online, and it’s never been hurled at me. (‘Internalized transphobia’ and ‘transmedicalism’, on the other hand, have been. What a surreal experience that was.)
Sexual orientation isn't a preference.
Which would be hypocrisy unless they to the same degree also wonder if lesbians are lesbians because lesbians think men are "less than". Do you?
You get what I mean. This nitpicking is not helpful.
Isn’t that kinda what ‘political lesbianism’ is about?
Other than that, I do think plenty of people refuse to admit a certain sexual attraction because of the stigma involved, yes. That’s pretty much what ‘comphet’ is about, and what ‘gold star lesbianism’ pushes bisexual women into.
It's not nitpicking, you are suggesting that we only "prefer" one sex to the other, when the other sex was never an option to begin with. Maybe it wasn't intentional from you part, fair enough, but I am not mind reader who can know what you don't actually mean.
Sure, so should we suspect someone to be political lesbian just because she isn't attracted to men? Maybe men should come to lesbian subs and make threads about this issue and tell lesbians they should examine their feelings about men so they truly know this lack of attraction isn't a result of bigotry toward men?
>That’s pretty much what ‘comphet’ is about
Telling lesbians they should make sure they don't see woman-identifying males as "less than" before ruling out males sexually seems like a comhet thing. It's like how males tell lesbians they might not have found the right male yet.
I am not sure what you mean here. Bisexual women are not lesbians. A "gold star" lesbian is just someone who has never had sex with a man. So what are you suggesting lesbians who don't have sexual experience with men are pushing bisexual women into?
Not so much one sex to the other so much as certain specific physical features. If a person who is attracted to women is not attracted to, say, a trans woman who transitioned early, with feminine fat distribution and skeletal structure, a feminine voice, etc., who has already undergone bottom surgery, maybe they just don’t like the particular taste and texture of a neovagina (as another GC user on this sub has mentioned), and that’s fine. But at this point I’d say this applies to a much narrower thing than the more all-encompassing term ‘orientation’.
The power dynamic is hugely different. As far as I’ve gleaned, political lesbians generally avoid men more because of fear than stigma they hold towards those below them on the social totem pole. Personally, I think it’s an extreme and unhealthy measure, but even if my opinion carried weight, making these threads would be counter-productive. And at any rate, I was under the impression that they did so regardless of any attraction to men, even if they were aware of it.
That wasn’t my point. My point was that lesbians are often unaware or in denial of their lesbian attaction because they’ve been told that being a woman means being attracted to men. It’s about social pressure dictating the expression of one’s true sexual desires.
I’m suggesting, based on several accounts I’ve heard, that they’re pushing bisexual men away from acting on their attraction to men.
And in the context of trans people, this sums up what I’m referring to.
You are talking about males so it's about males not being female. Calling exclusive attraction to female a "preference" is wrong as males never were an option to begin with.
Suspecting lesbians of bigotry for not being sexually into male trans people who identify as women is also putting social pressure upon lesbians to disregard their true sexual desires. Most people don't want be regarded as a bigot, you know that.
I have no idea why you think lesbians who haven't slept with men would try to push bisexual men away from being with men, I honestly couldn't care less about bisexual men acting on their attractions to other men. And I feel the same way about bisexual women, I don't care who they have sex with.
The example is a parody so I'm not sure what phenomena you are referring to here. Yes, it would be of poor taste if I went to straight sub and lectured straight women there about how I personally see the idea of sexually interacting with a man repulsive. But I don't think lesbians should have to stay in the closet with our sexual orientation, and there is nothing inherently wrong with not being into males, and that should be a perfectly okay topic in a lesbian sub. I similarly don't take offense if gay men in gay subs talk about being into males and not females, neither would I regard such talk as "pushing" lesbians away from acting on our attraction to women, gay men having a different sexual orientation than me doesn't pressure me in any way.
LMFAO
This was very very helpful for me to read. Thank you for taking the time to respond.
On the issue of bathrooms, I want to say that I am one of those natal women who does not mind if a trans woman who presents as an actual woman is in a bathroom with me. It does not make me feel unsafe or self conscious. Moreover, I understand the issue of safety that it would be very hard to use the men’s room.
However, there are three issues.
1. There is no reason a male-presenting person needs to be in the women’s room, at all. They can safely use the men’s room.
2. I have seen enough unsolicited and unwanted penises in my life, I don’t need to see any in a space I’m not expecting them.
3. Most importantly, it is not up to me. I do not get to speak on behalf of all women. As you saw in the thread you linked, many women feel deeply uncomfortable with male bodies in female spaces, having nothing to do with any kind of bigotry or hatred.
I used to think the bathroom thing wasn’t a big deal. My cousins wife is a butch lesbian who has been harassed in women’s rooms by people who think she’s a guy. She sometimes just uses the men’s room in order to avoid these problems. I like the idea of people just being where they feel comfortable and safe.
What it comes down to for any of the issues relating to women’s spaces, is this: 1. Why was this space created in the first place? 2. If we allow male-bodied individuals in, does this space still meet the initial purpose? That is to say, does it still provide physical and emotional safety to the women who use it? And 3. who gets to determine the answers to these questions?
In my opinion, TW should stay out of that debate and wait until they are welcomed. If they have needs that are not being met due to the exclusion, they can lobby for another solution. (Not allowed in the DV shelter? Lobby for public funding or raise private dollars to create a gender neutral or LGBT shelter or even one that is simply gender-inclusive.... but don’t bring the pitchforks for the women’s shelter that wants to remain sex-segregated).
Again, thanks for answering OPs questions, I learned a lot about the other perspective.
You’re most welcome. I’m always happy to contribute to positive discourse.
What I’m suggesting is to make bathrooms unisex to begin with: just have stalls that anyone can use, and maybe a separate room with urinals.
The original use of those spaces was, well, to urinate and defecate (and change pads/tampons), but those are done in the privacy of stalls anyway. Using them as a refuge from an objectifying gaze is a later purpose I assume came later, and I certainly gave it more weight like I said, but after my friend’s remark about women doing the same I’m not sure it fulfills that purpose even now.
To be honest, I think the gender segregation is counter-productive. Living in Israel and seeing what it’s like in religious communities, it seems to me that if anything it just motivates more ignorance and begets some amount of dehumanization. In fact, there are some feminists who want to de-segregate sports because of that.
As for shelters: obviously those are all noble causes, but they take time. A trans woman who just fled her abusive partner can’t wait for a shelter to be built, especially if she’s been shunned by her family and friends for being trans to begin with. What should she do in that situation? What should we?
Most women don’t believe that “gender segregation is counter productive” We believe it is vital, or we wouldn’t be fighting for the right to private spaces. And we get to be the arbiter of our own priorities.
I feel terrible about trans women fleeing abusive partners. I feel terrible for any person fleeing an abusive partner. Lack of such facilities for all sexes is in fact a huge issue. I would like there to be services for any vulnerable individual who needs them. But there are legitimate reasons to keep them sex segregated.
This is a digression, but do you know what’s to blame for people like me losing support on this issue? Subjective self identity being the only criteria. The fact that somebody can just say “I feel in my head that I am a woman” and that means they can gain access to any vulnerable place.
If the door wasn’t flung open like that, I wouldn’t feel compelled to put up as many safeguards. Do I think a medically transitioned trans woman who lives as a woman and has been convicted of a non-violent crime should be housed with women in prison? Yes, I think that’s the best place for her.
Do I think that a serial rapist with an intact penis should be with the women? Fuck no! But when you say “trans women are women” with no allowance for debate or discussion on the impact that has, then you put yourself in a philosophical corner. Because if that is literally, legally true, then we would have no basis to deny people like Karen White. 40% of the “transgender” inmates in UK women’s prisons are sex offenders. Because in an attempt to remove burdens for trans women to access services, they left the door open for any creep who wants to get in. How is that even good for the actual trans women? They don’t deserve to be locked up with rapists either.
Instead, what I’d like to say is “trans women are trans women”. I would like a philosophical, political framework that seeks to protect their safety and meet their needs.
You raise a very interesting social point here. If anti-trans sentiment in a given society is so strong, that all of a transwoman's family and friends abandon him when he comes out, that's indeed very, very sad.
But why would you expect women who are complete strangers, women who have just fled their own abusive husbands, to be comfortable living in close quarters with him? When his own family isn't? When his body, his voice, his mannerisms may well remind them of their own abusers?
You are asking too much of women in society, when you're asking them to do what a transwoman's family or friends won't do.
If a doctor deems it medically neccesary to give a child puberty blockers to alleviate or prevent future gender dysphoria I will agree with their decision.
I don't believe there to be any significant difference between a male and female's brain.
This is a very... broad question.
Any group can congregate and exclude whoever they wish from their private gatherings.
I'm not non-binary so I won't comment.
The set of roles, expectations and behaviours that society expects and instills to people of a certain sex to perform.
Body dysphoria.
What do you think about the cotton ceiling?
If the only reason you wouldn't date somebody is because they are transgender, and you are otherwise attracted to them like any other person who would meet your 'minimum' requirements (sex), then that is a transphobic dating preferenc
You are free to date whoever you wish to date but don't say "trans people icky" and don't expect a response.
Rowling has not cited any statistical evidence she cites meaning there is no possibility of analysing her comments from a validity point of view.
I will remain steadfast in that she used the name of a man who championed gay conversion therapy and said "haha COINCIDENCE" when asked about it. The book involves a TW being threatened with prison rape for comic relief.
This all comes from the most notorious queerbaiter of all time who claims to support LGBT people while refusing to put it in any major release she's done, and not even taking it seriously when she makes a pisspoor attempt at that whole "DuMbLEdORe Is GaY!" charade we had to endure.
It is up to sporting organisations to decide what categories they think people should participate in. Personally I don't give a rat's ass about sport so eh.
I don't think anyone should be subjected to the horror that is communal bathrooms or changing rooms. All facilities of such nature should be forced to convert to self-contained bathrooms/changing rooms.
No.
No.
I don't know, I am not transgender and have never had gender dysphoria.
GC people contribute to an atmosphere which belittles and harasses trans people, which makes it more acceptable for more violent types to commit violence or suicide bait people.
You're going to need to give me a study here chief.
No one is suggesting that transitioning is the sole cure for gender dysphoria. It should be used alongside a family/friends support network and therapy or psychotics.
An adult human female.
God could you get anymore loaded with these "questions"
So if I as a lesbian meet a good looking female person who meets my 'minimum' requirement of being of female the sex, but the female person reveals identifying as a man, then it would transphobic if that man-identity was a dealbreaker to me? I can at least respect that position for being consistent instead of the logical fallacy of calling lesbians transphobic for rejecting someone for being male.
If you are not attracted to male people then it’s no transphobic. The reason you’re not attracted to them is because their sex does not match the biological sex you are attracted to.
If I went on a date with this woman and had a great time and felt a lot of chemistry, but then lost attraction when I found out she was 19, would I be ageist? Teenphobic, perhaps?
What relevance does that have to the question?
The direct analogy you’re trying to make is by saying that someone being trans makes them unattractive to you, which is transphobia, or if you want it in less confrontational terms, prejudiced.
After my own experience with a bipolar boyfriend I wouldn’t date someone if they were bipolar. That doesn’t mean I’m not being prejudiced with my thinking, but I don’t try and hide behind analogies to justify it.
I'm not hiding behind anything. I'm asking you a question. You're the one deflecting. It's a simple yes or no, and you wrote three paragraphs to avoid answering.
Yes, woman-identifying males aren't of the biologcal sex I am attracted to.
Yes... I am agreeing with you.
1. How do you feel about children being given puberty blockers/hormones? Do you thing a child should be considered trans?
I have no problem with it if it's what's best for the child.
2. What’s your take on the whole male brain/female brain thing?
There are studies that show that trans people have similar brains to the gender they identify with?
3. What do you think about female-only spaces?
All spaced should be gender neutral except maybe sports.
4. What makes someone non-binary vs. being a gender non-conforming man/woman?
To me being non-binary means having an androgynous presentation. When strangers see you, they can't tell if your male or female.
5. Do you think being trans is about the the body dysphoria (i.e wanting to have the body of the opposite sex) or gender as in roles/stereotypes and the patriarchy’s system of oppression?
Dysphoria.
6. How do you define gender? If defined differently than the above, how is this a more useful definition?
Gender is another term for sed, because sex means sexual intercourse.
9. What do you think about Rowling’s comments?
Transphobic. Though I like Harry Potter.
10. Women’s sports? Bathrooms/changing rooms?
I think all bathrooms and locker rooms should be gender neutral with no gaps in the stalls.
11. Do you equate intersex with someone who has had SRS? Do you think a women that has had double mastectomies is less of a women because she no longer has her secondary sex characteristics?
No
16. What do you think about the ‘trans murder epidemic’ and how it is being weaponised against people who disagree even slightly with queer theory on social media?
I started a sub called r/thishappens, where we document crimes against trans people.
Prisons, hospitals wards, mental health wards, school dorms?
Why sport, but nothing else?
Not agreeing with OP, but I’m wondering where you live that hospital wards are sex segregated? Every hospital I’ve been in has been mixed. I had uterine fibroid surgery (doesn’t get much more female sex specific than that) and there were both male and female patients on my floor.
On the floor, but the bedrooms? Never saw that.
Hmm, come to think of it I (or the people I was visiting) have always been in single rooms or at most one roommate which was of the same sex. Never really noticed it until you mention it.
So is Sam Smith not non-binary because he does really look male
How do you know? Do you think the research proves that the models and approaches used work? Even tho the great majority of children detransition?
Do you think these are good studies? Do you think you have a female brain that is different than the brain of males? What is a female brain? Since females have been consistently underepresented in STEM compared to men, is this due to their female brain?
So i should be pat down by a man in an airport without being allowed to ask for a woman (ie female human)?
If you want to respond, feel free to focus on just a few points i realize this is a lot. Although if there is 1 thing i want to be answered is the point about non binary and Sam Smith
I'm not sure where this person is getting their ideas on enbies. Many American enby women are very gender conforming.
Have you seen the latest phrase - “nonbinary people don’t owe you androgyny”. In practice, this means “nonbinary people don’t owe you the slightest hint of gender nonconformity”. In fact, enby females seem to increasingly be very feminine.
😀 I wasn’t familiar with the phrase but the first article I read on envies had a pic of a very cute, mildly hip, mixed race woman who you’d expect to see at a farmer’s market or drinks spot. So normal.
Show me research where the majority of children detransition.
According to the Cleveland Clinic:
Though research in this area is extremly limited. I want more research.
You should be able to ask for a woman.
I have read some of these studies for past threads, if you have enough time to waste you could search for them - they are absolute trash and still don't support the idea of a male/female brain
As in adult female human or?
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15532739.2018.1456390
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15532739.2018.1468292?scroll=top&needAccess=true
I am much more convinced bt the reply. As in, yes there are issues with methodologies, but a lot of the critique ignores the usual standards of clinical research.
You seem so shocked that the standard recognised is that around 80% of children detransition, and yet even researchers in the field know they need to approach this number and consider why this number might not be fully representative of the truth. However they do not blindly ignore that research so far has shown that 80% of children detransition
One thing these studies ignore is also how the 'trans' label is much wider than what they are using. So how many kids tried for themselves the non binary (for example) label online for a few months and then "detransitioned" from that? Who knows..
I really liked the part in the reply where the authors point out that they are not talking about 'trans kids' but rather about children with dysphoria that experience that distressing feeling, that says nothing about their gender identity. Because guess what? Cannot define gender identity in any way that a scientist will thinks that makes sense (ie it is not 1) valid or 2) reliable. It is also not a lot of other things, but a basic of validity and reliability is a must).
The first author seemed quite confused and i really don't like the implications about this sort of researcb being 'unethical'. However i can see how QT eventually leads to that because any questioning of trans identity is seen as an attack and transphobia
There seems to be a much longer chain of back and forth by even more authors. I love this sort of exchanges by researchers. It's basically this subreddit but with real names and way more implied sass, but still so so sassy!
I didn't link to the studies that show the 80% because 1) it is established enough that i don't think it's very useful and 2) it is cited in the articles i linked, which also give more context and analysis around the stat
(Btw, this is how you link scientific evidence. Against my better judgement i opened the link you gave.. yeah pass on that.)
Could you show me the studies stating the brain differences between men and women and cis- and transpeople of the same birth sex?
1. I don't support it as I don't really endorse medical transition at all, but I accept that some people are going to do it anyway. I think that if people are going to put hormones and puberty blockers in their body, they should be given appropriate medical advice and medical care regardless of their age.
2. I don't have a background in biology or neuroscience so my understanding of this is pretty limited, but as far as I know organs appearing in both sexes aren't considered male or female, and were able to perform successful cross sex organ transplants. I haven't seen any evidence that the brain is an exception. That being said there's some evidence that there are some structures in the brain that have different sizes and grey matter densities in males and females. We also have evidence that hormone exposure can affect behavioral traits. This suggests that there could be some amount of masculinization/feminization that can occur in the brain.
3. I'm fine with them and think they are necessary in today's society.
4. Whatever they say they are.
5. I think it starts with roles and stereotypes and progresses into a body issue in the majority of cases. Otherwise more people would know they were trans from a very young age.
6. It's somewhat of a nebulous concept these days, but refers to sex in social and cultural capacity rather than a biological one.
7. I respect peoples right to identify however they want, but I don't think its preferable to gender abolition.
8. Not very familiar with this, but anyone should be able to decide who they do or don't want to date or have sex with for any reason. In fact they should even have to provide a reason, just "no" is enough. Pressuring someone to change their mind is creepy and rapey.
9. Also not super familiar with this but I don't think they're all that bad.
10. It should be up to the owner to decide. If I was in charge they would all based on natal sex and there would be additional, gender neutral/inclusive options.
11. no
12. Gender Identity is the way a person thinks about them self with regard to their gender/sex. Similar to how peoples names and occupations can be part of their identity, gender can also be internalized this way. If you ask a person if they are a man or a woman the answer they give you will probably reflect their gender identity. I also believe that it was a term that was medicalized to enable access to medical transition and doesn't hold much value outside of that. The feeling of being a man or a woman is probably just enjoying things stereotypically associated with that sex.
13. I haven't seen enough data to have a stance on this
14. I think the rate is high for a number of reasons, namely because its impossible to actually change sex. A lifetime of desperately wanting and chasing something you can never have, hiding an undeniable fact about yourself, and denying biological reality is probably exhausting. It makes sense to me that this could lead to overwhelming psychological distress and suicidal ideation. There's probably other factors as well, such as transphobia, discrimination, the process of medical transition, and more, that add to an already stressful lifestyle.
15. I think that definition is accurate, but I'll play along for the sake of politeness if somebody includes trans women in theirs.
16. Not sure its quite an epidemic, there were 22 trans women killed in 2019 which is fairly small compared to the 87,000 women who were killed in 2017 (couldn't find a 2019 stat).
1: I'm against any form of physically transitioning children up until around 16 to avoid the potential for the type of rapid onset dysphoria that sometimes shows in early adolescents and goes away on its own. At that point I would be okay with giving them blockers if there is clear dysphoria, if other psychological issues have been ruled out, and if a medical professional thinks it would be beneficial.
2: I'm assuming that you mean in regards to trans issues and not just differences between male and female brains as a whole. In that case, my viewpoint is that there is something in the brains of trans people that makes them uncomfortable with their biological sex and experience dysphoria. I don't think that this makes them fit any stereotypical traits of their desired sex, but I do think that transgenderism has a biological cause that is likely rooted in the brain developing in a way that their birthsex should not have.
3: Depends on the context and alternatives available. Given the rarity of bathroom assaults, I don't think it is reasonable to keep MtF's from using girl's bathrooms. I would accept different locker rooms due to their exposed nature, though I think places that provide them should all have private alternatives to prevent putting trans people in an awkward situation. As far as women's only social groups, you do have a right to exclude trans people as you do any group of people, though I also think you're a bit of an asshole if you do.
4: I'm not NB so I won't elaborate too much on this one, as I don't have a right to speak for them. In my opinion, a GNC man/woman is someone who is not attempting to signal that their sex is different than what they were born as, but rather someone who doesn't attempt to follow the gender stereotypes associated with their sex. On the other hand, NB people are uncomfortable with signaling to the world that they are male or female, and their presentation is simply one of the ways that they alter this perception.
5: I absolutely believe that being trans is mostly about a discomfort with one's birthsex and is completely separate from stereotypical gender roles. I believe that the place of gender stereotypes in the trans experience is little more than a tool used to modify what sex one is perceived as. My interests did not change from before I began identifying as trans to after, but my presentation did in an attempt to change which gender I am perceived as by those who I interact with.
6: I would define gender as the sex that you are perceived as to the world, while your sex is the set of biological traits that are different from male to female. As an example, I would say menstrual equality is a sex based issue because it applies based on the biological makeup that one was born with, while workplace discrimination is a gender-based issue because it happens based on what sex one is perceived as, and could happen to a MtF as well if they passed enough that nobody could tell the difference.
7: Passing because I'm not NB.
8: Everybody has a right to decide who they do and do not want to date. I have no issues with someone who is only attracted to cis women because they are not interested in penises.
9: The thread of comments that she made regarding "sex is real" I have no issues with, as I elaborated on in #6. However, I do take some issue with the "letter from a terrified lesbian" article that she recently shared, specifically the author's implication that there is an issue with requiring preferred pronouns in the workplace. The article attempts to make an argument that requiring preferred pronouns is a form of lesbian oppression when it is little more than a slight gesture to make the lives of trans people easier.
As far as her support of Maya Forstater's tweets, I am conflicted. On one hand, I support the rights of females to have female only spaces when it is necessary for safety and privacy such as locker rooms/prisons, or to protect their right to fair competition. On the other hand, forcing transpeople to keep their birthsex as their legal gender also causes safety issues such as automatically outing them to anyone who sees their ID. I'm not quite sure what the answer is on this one to be honest, so I'll leave it at that.
10: For sports, I lean towards leaving women's sports for females only and offering more co-ed options so that trans people still have the ability to compete. Locker rooms, I'm fine with restricting them based on body parts so long as a private alternative is available.
11: No and no.
12: Gender identity is the comfort, or lack thereof, of presenting oneself as a specific sex to the world and of having the body of a specific sex. My gender identity is female because I am extraordinarily uncomfortable with being perceived as male and having a male body, and this discomfort is alleviated by presenting myself as a female and altering my body to resemble one.
13: I think they encourage it. I've scrolled through my fair share of GC in self-hatred fueled days, and a significant amount of the posts paint MtF's in negative lights, specifically as sexual deviants. Hell, /r/itsafetish is a whole subreddit dedicated to exactly that. I believe that this has real-world consequences of sparking and fueling transphobia in people because it forces people to perceive trans people as fetishistic exhibitionist, and the subset of these people who will become violent can and will do so. It also causes some people to perceive actions that are not threatening in themselves, such as going to the bathroom, as a precursor to an attack, which they then "defend" themselves against. Comments about "if I saw a man go into the women's bathroom with my wife I'd beat them senseless" are very common and are fueled by this mindset, despite that most of these people probably just want to pee and don't pass particularly well.
14: As far as I can tell, most of the studies that we have done so far indicate a lower suicide rate after transition than before it. I think that if we reached a nirvana of pure trans acceptance then the suicide rate would be significantly lower post-transition, but we obviously don't and so at least some of the post-transition suicides are due to hostile workplaces/family interactions/etc caused by the transition.
15: I hit on this in 6, which is that I would define it as someone who is perceived as an adult human female to the world. I think this is a better definition because as I said in 6, there are ways that people are oppressed based on their biological sex. However, some forms of oppression happen based on the sex somebody is perceived to be. For example, a passing FtM would not face workplace sexual harassment in the same way that a female who presents as such would. Likewise, passing MtF's face many of the same safety issues that females who present as such do such as being raped (though the situation obviously changes if they are pre-op once it has been discovered).
16: Killing trans people is bad, M'kay? I explained why I believe "GC" beliefs encourage violence in 13. Good faith discussion should not be shut down, but blame should be given where it is due.
Now if you'll excuse me, it's time to reheat the coffee I forgot about an hour ago when I started writing this.
A common theme i see in these replies is that no one knows anything about non-binary, either refusing to answer or just giving answers that are clearly conflicting..i find this really interesting
It depends on the circumstances. For one thing, I wouldn't have an issue with it if the group is directly related to an issue that a (fully passing) trans person would experience differently. For example, a support group relating to pregnancy or rape. However, if a social group excludes a person on the sole basis of their trans status when it has nothing to do with the purpose of the group then I would call that rude. Granted, nobody is under any obligation to be nice, so the point is relatively moot as I'm not arguing for any enforcement so much as making a moral judgment.
There are certainly advantages to being in a space for people like oneself such as being able to talk about issues that affect them freely, and in this instance, I would say the onus is on the trans person to be okay with issues being discussed that don't necessarily affect them since they are the exception to the rule. If that is not the case and the trans person takes issue with the discussion of these topics, as I have seen many GCers say is the basis for their desire to exclude trans people from their spaces, then at that point I see it as fair to exclude the person in question on the basis that they are being unreasonable. This is how the vast majority of female social groups I have encountered handle trans people, and very few of them have had issues. Yes, there are some Twitter warriors who will muck things up, but there are a lot more trans people who are just happy to be included and are just going to awkwardly sit there if the group starts talking about a female-only issue that doesn't affect them.
Ok, thanks for the clarification. I agree with it!
Puberty blockers are fine. There are a ton of studies to back this up. Whip out the old trans rights factsheet and jump to 'puberty blockers' for some of said studies.
I need to see more studies. I believe that gender dysphoria is something that's caused in the brain but that doesn't mean that there are inherent male/female brains either.
They're cool.
You identify as non-binary. That's it. I don't see why this would be a bad thing.
For one trans person it can be the first yet for another it could be the second.
Both.
Social construct based on expectations that have been constructed around sex.
I don't see a problem with either, the first seems more fun though.
If you don't want to date someone with a penis, then don't. But please don't go out and fucking gatekeep people from being lesbians just because they're in a relationship with a trans woman or non-binary person
They're missing the point
Sports:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357259/
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/NCLR_TransStudentAthlete%2B(2).pdf
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357259/
Changing rooms:
Gender neutral changing rooms in addition to the already existing ones.
Depends on if they identify as a woman or not.
Stop it with the 'feeling of being a woman/man. Really, as long as they wish to be something then let them be something.
Not that I know of.
It's lower after transitioning. Please reply to me if you want to see studies bit it's 0:50 and I'm tired af lol
Literally just anyone who identifies as a woman is a woman. If you want to describe yourself as an 'adult human female', then just use that; adult human female.
I don't know much about this so I don't think I should talk about this haha.