4 ms·

People don’t like their identity being debated. Bringing up trans women in sports as a talking point would be pretty upsetting to most trans women as it is like

People don’t like their identity being debated. Bringing up trans women in sports as a talking point would be pretty upsetting to most trans women as it is likely to feel like you’re invalidating their personal experience of being trans. There’s this thing with marginalized communities where people outside of the communities “just want to have a discussion” but the stakes of that conversation are way too high for marginalized people. Trans people’s existence is not for you to challenge or debate. The best thing to do in situations like this is to let the marginalized people figure out what they need and then quietly listen to their conclusions. It’s not really something that’s there for you to “discuss”.

textgel 5y ago
Yes funnily enough those who wanted to "Just have a discussion" were the ones who forced us into this mess in the first place. People might not like "having their identity being debated" but people also don't like having their opportunities taken away or being forced into situations they don't feel comfortable in or ones that threaten their safety. I think the best thing for you to do in situations like this is quietly listen to the counter points being given to you and gently and wholesomely get your hands off of the people and their lives that you are reaching for. It's really not something you are entitled to have or control.
- TaylorAlexander 5y ago
  Trans people are not “reaching for” anyone’s lives they just want to be able to exist in society without being harassed.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    Everyone here agrees that they oughtn't be harassed. We disagree on whether or not folks who disagree with trans activists have the right to speak on the matter.
    - textgel 5y ago
      And the definition of harassed
Moodles 5y ago
I'm sorry, but this is a classic example of what I'm talking about. > People don’t like their identity being debated. But this is reframing. I'm not debating that someone is trans or should be treated with respect or anything like that. > Bringing up trans women in sports as a talking point would be pretty upsetting to most trans women as it is likely to feel like you’re invalidating their personal experience of being trans. Ok? Feelings might be hurt. Feelings are subjective. That's not an argument. It's also pretty upsetting for the women who are now competing at a biological disadvantage. Particularly in combat sports where there's potentially dier consequences for losing. What about their feelings? > Trans people’s existence is not for you to challenge or debate. Again... That's not what I'm challenging or debating at all. I'll be honest, I fucking hate this debate switcheroo. I'm not challenging someone's existence. Listen to what I'm actually saying. This is so annoying to me. > The best thing to do in situations like this is to let the marginalized people figure out what they need and then quietly listen to their conclusions No, it isn't. Not when it affects more than just the marginalized community. If their actions affect others (e.g. women) then it's not primarily up to just them to figure out what they want to do. Again, this is nothing to do with hate or bigotry. I'm not "debating their existence". I literally don't know how much clearer I can be here. Sorry, I can't respond anymore since my account has been rate limited.
- TaylorAlexander 5y ago
  You can say you’re not debating their existence till they’re blue in the face, but I’m telling you that’s how it will feel to 9/10 trans people when you try to discuss this topic with them. You can ignore their feelings but that’s the problem. You don’t care that it’s upsetting. To you it’s just some abstract intellectual thing to discuss but to them it could be a source of trauma and pain. I don’t think you’re appreciating what you’re asking a trans person to do when you bring up topics that relate to trauma they’ve experienced.
  - Moodles 5y ago
    > You can say you’re not debating their existence till they’re blue in the face, but I’m telling you that’s how it will feel to 9/10 trans people when you try to discuss this topic with them. Indeed. Though I'm honestly not sure if it's "9/10 trans people" or just the gender ideology crowd. Regardless, having strong feelings doesn't win the debate. I can give platitudes all day about how sympathetic I am to people with gender dysmorphia or any other difficulties in life, but when it comes to debating issues, we need to be more dispassionate as my original point and the point of the Economist article is that these topics are nuanced and shutting down the conversation as "hate speech" is not productive at all. > You can ignore their feelings but that’s the problem. You don’t care that it’s upsetting. No, in my view, this type of comment is the problem. You're assuming I don't care at all just because I disagree. Please just take my comments at face value. I said in my original comment I have sympathy for trans people. > To you it’s just some abstract intellectual thing to discuss but to them it could be a source of trauma and pain Take the women in mixed martial arts. To them, it's a source of actual, physical pain.
throwaway894345 5y ago
> There’s this thing with marginalized communities where people outside of the communities “just want to have a discussion” but the stakes of that conversation are way too high for marginalized people. Presumably the "high stakes" are that they might fall out with the majority population, right? In that case why not do all you can to engage productively with them? There was a time when civil rights activists wished for good faith participation. > The best thing to do in situations like this is to let the marginalized people figure out what they need and then quietly listen to their conclusions. There are a couple of problems here. The first is that "their conclusions" are often the conclusions of certain activists and not the marginalized people in question (e.g., "defund the police"). I find this to be the most repulsive kind of rhetoric, because it exploits marginalized groups to the harm of everyone else and to the exclusive benefit of the activist and their ideological comrades. The second is that it dehumanizes everyone else: others are to simply keep quiet and listen to the marginalized group's needs; to acquiesce. We are all (aspirationally, at least) equal participants in a free society, and we need to find something that works for all of us. Debate is how we do that, even if the topic hits closer to home for some than others.

textgel 5y ago

Yes funnily enough those who wanted to "Just have a discussion" were the ones who forced us into this mess in the first place. People might not like "having their identity being debated" but people also don't like having their opportunities taken away or being forced into situations they don't feel comfortable in or ones that threaten their safety. I think the best thing for you to do in situations like this is quietly listen to the counter points being given to you and gently and wholesomely get your hands off of the people and their lives that you are reaching for. It's really not something you are entitled to have or control.

TaylorAlexander 5y ago
Trans people are not “reaching for” anyone’s lives they just want to be able to exist in society without being harassed.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  Everyone here agrees that they oughtn't be harassed. We disagree on whether or not folks who disagree with trans activists have the right to speak on the matter.
  - textgel 5y ago
    And the definition of harassed

Moodles 5y ago

I'm sorry, but this is a classic example of what I'm talking about. > People don’t like their identity being debated. But this is reframing. I'm not debating that someone is trans or should be treated with respect or anything like that. > Bringing up trans women in sports as a talking point would be pretty upsetting to most trans women as it is likely to feel like you’re invalidating their personal experience of being trans. Ok? Feelings might be hurt. Feelings are subjective. That's not an argument. It's also pretty upsetting for the women who are now competing at a biological disadvantage. Particularly in combat sports where there's potentially dier consequences for losing. What about their feelings? > Trans people’s existence is not for you to challenge or debate. Again... That's not what I'm challenging or debating at all. I'll be honest, I fucking hate this debate switcheroo. I'm not challenging someone's existence. Listen to what I'm actually saying. This is so annoying to me. > The best thing to do in situations like this is to let the marginalized people figure out what they need and then quietly listen to their conclusions No, it isn't. Not when it affects more than just the marginalized community. If their actions affect others (e.g. women) then it's not primarily up to just them to figure out what they want to do. Again, this is nothing to do with hate or bigotry. I'm not "debating their existence". I literally don't know how much clearer I can be here. Sorry, I can't respond anymore since my account has been rate limited.

TaylorAlexander 5y ago
You can say you’re not debating their existence till they’re blue in the face, but I’m telling you that’s how it will feel to 9/10 trans people when you try to discuss this topic with them. You can ignore their feelings but that’s the problem. You don’t care that it’s upsetting. To you it’s just some abstract intellectual thing to discuss but to them it could be a source of trauma and pain. I don’t think you’re appreciating what you’re asking a trans person to do when you bring up topics that relate to trauma they’ve experienced.
- Moodles 5y ago
  > You can say you’re not debating their existence till they’re blue in the face, but I’m telling you that’s how it will feel to 9/10 trans people when you try to discuss this topic with them. Indeed. Though I'm honestly not sure if it's "9/10 trans people" or just the gender ideology crowd. Regardless, having strong feelings doesn't win the debate. I can give platitudes all day about how sympathetic I am to people with gender dysmorphia or any other difficulties in life, but when it comes to debating issues, we need to be more dispassionate as my original point and the point of the Economist article is that these topics are nuanced and shutting down the conversation as "hate speech" is not productive at all. > You can ignore their feelings but that’s the problem. You don’t care that it’s upsetting. No, in my view, this type of comment is the problem. You're assuming I don't care at all just because I disagree. Please just take my comments at face value. I said in my original comment I have sympathy for trans people. > To you it’s just some abstract intellectual thing to discuss but to them it could be a source of trauma and pain Take the women in mixed martial arts. To them, it's a source of actual, physical pain.

throwaway894345 5y ago

> There’s this thing with marginalized communities where people outside of the communities “just want to have a discussion” but the stakes of that conversation are way too high for marginalized people. Presumably the "high stakes" are that they might fall out with the majority population, right? In that case why not do all you can to engage productively with them? There was a time when civil rights activists wished for good faith participation. > The best thing to do in situations like this is to let the marginalized people figure out what they need and then quietly listen to their conclusions. There are a couple of problems here. The first is that "their conclusions" are often the conclusions of certain activists and not the marginalized people in question (e.g., "defund the police"). I find this to be the most repulsive kind of rhetoric, because it exploits marginalized groups to the harm of everyone else and to the exclusive benefit of the activist and their ideological comrades. The second is that it dehumanizes everyone else: others are to simply keep quiet and listen to the marginalized group's needs; to acquiesce. We are all (aspirationally, at least) equal participants in a free society, and we need to find something that works for all of us. Debate is how we do that, even if the topic hits closer to home for some than others.