5 ms·

Let's start with this: I don't know how I can explain why this kind of discourse opens trans people up to violence if we can't first agree why this is transphob

Let's start with this: I don't know how I can explain why this kind of discourse opens trans people up to violence if we can't first agree why this is transphobic. Fundamentally we keep having this conversation in humanity. "This is wrong (homophobic, transphobic, racist, classist, casteist)" "No it isn't!" And over and over and over again. And we look back and think how could it have been possible that we were SO discriminatory in the past, but SO enlightened now, and yet we repeat the same mistakes again. And you have some feminists that exclude trans women. And you have some black people perpetuating homophobia. 15 years ago we were having EXACTLY the same discourse about gay marriage as we do today about trans rights. It's exhausting how much some humans are committed to making the lives of other humans on this planet shitty. Fuck, let people live their lives. We all only get one.

nomel 4y ago
> Fuck, let people live their lives. We all only get one. I think this is greatly simplifying the concerns that people have in transitioning minors, the statistically anomalous rise in minors that identify as trans [1], and the safety of puberty blockers. For example, see the data that guided the recent Swedish health board decisions to mostly stop puberty blockers. I'm pointing out "minors", because it's all I see in serious discussions. These discussions, and even Sweden's decision, is labeled transphobic. It's trivial to find news article with the title "Sweden is killing trans people". The word "minor" appears to be the wedge driving the trans division, where those that don't support know that minors aren't good with permanent decision, and those that do support it know that the permanent decision needs to be made as early as possible. I don't think the wedge will be removed without hard science proving safety, which natures statement can only impede. As some evidence that 15 years ago was better for LGB than it is now for T: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dramatic_television_series_with_LGBT_characters:_1960s–2000s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dramatic_television_se... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transgender_characters_in_television https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transgender_characters... 1. Doubled since 2017: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/10/science/transgender-teenagers-national-survey.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/10/science/transgender-teena... 5x in 13-17 vs 65 years old: https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/06/10/study-300000-youth-ages-13-17-identify-as-transgender-in-the-us/ https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/06/10/study-300000-yout...
- magicalist 4y ago
  - nomel 4y ago
    I'm sorry, but it's not that simple. Transitioning should start before puberty, for best outcome. There's no way to not "think of the children" since the best outcome requires children: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31682347/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31682347/
    - mike00632 4y ago
      Delaying puberty isn't "transitioning". You mentioned hormone blockers so you seem to have some knowledge which makes me think that you are intentionally misrepresenting what is happening in order to deny medical care to trans children. Despicable.
      - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
        How do children who exhibit behaviors that the doctors and parents stereotype as opposite-sex benefit from having their natural development blocked with and/or overwhelmed with opposite-sex hormones? Most parents are fine with gender non-conforming children (in the parent's mind of course - the kid is just being themselves). It's not a panic for them to ask why modifying their child's body to match their toy choice is so important.
        mike00632 4y ago
        1. Many parents are not fine with trans children. By suggesting that trans children are welcome you are ignoring the very real problems that the Conservative monsters are currently inflicting on them. 2. They benefit from having extra time to make a decision. When you (unnaturally, via the force of law) block children from receiving medical care then you cause them to develop sex characteristics that don't belong to them. If you think about it, you are doing to these children much worse than anything you are suggesting trans advocates are doing.
LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
> And you have some feminists that exclude trans women. No "trans woman" is ever a woman. They're men, males. You're trying to take women's rights from females by denying them a way to uniquely identify themselves. This right here is why "trans rights", as activists choose to define it, can never happen. If you can take the words woman and female, Germany could redefine Jew and China can redefine Uighur, and everyone could identify as black-descendant-of-slavery to access scholarships.
- mpalmer 4y ago
  You're trying to take women's rights from females by denying them a way to uniquely identify themselves. Rights are not a zero-sum game or some kind of exhaustible resource; I have no idea what you're getting at with this. I challenge your contention that "a way to uniquely identify themselves" is a right of biological women or other groups. Never heard of any such right; it sounds totally made up. --- The meaning of words is what all people agree on. In the US, marriage used to mean a legally recognized union between a man and a woman of the same race. Otherwise it was miscegenation, or sodomy. Then as times changed, they added a qualifier: "mixed marriage" or "mixed-race marriage". Same thing happened in the last decade with gay marriage. In both cases, it eventually just turned back into marriage again. You disagree that trans women are women. Fine. Activists are trying to make the case that they are; that womanhood encompasses more than being biologically female, and same for manhood. A lot of people agree. --- You say that everyone could identify as black-descendant-of-slavery to access scholarships. I say you are making a laughable category error. (Did people start marrying their dogs after Obergefell was decided? They did not.) The reason someone identifies as something other than their birth gender isn't well-understood, but it is fair to say that hormones and the development of the brain play a significant role in the way people think and behave. Hormones have strong ties to sex and gender. They have very, very little to do with race. Category error. If non-black people started identifying as black to claim their piece of a societal debt to the ancestors of slaves, they would be (and have been[1]) ridiculed. Most people don't try this, because the vast majority of society agrees that is not acceptable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal
  - 4y ago

nomel 4y ago

> Fuck, let people live their lives. We all only get one. I think this is greatly simplifying the concerns that people have in transitioning minors, the statistically anomalous rise in minors that identify as trans [1], and the safety of puberty blockers. For example, see the data that guided the recent Swedish health board decisions to mostly stop puberty blockers. I'm pointing out "minors", because it's all I see in serious discussions. These discussions, and even Sweden's decision, is labeled transphobic. It's trivial to find news article with the title "Sweden is killing trans people". The word "minor" appears to be the wedge driving the trans division, where those that don't support know that minors aren't good with permanent decision, and those that do support it know that the permanent decision needs to be made as early as possible. I don't think the wedge will be removed without hard science proving safety, which natures statement can only impede. As some evidence that 15 years ago was better for LGB than it is now for T: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dramatic_television_series_with_LGBT_characters:_1960s–2000s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dramatic_television_se... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transgender_characters_in_television https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transgender_characters... 1. Doubled since 2017: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/10/science/transgender-teenagers-national-survey.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/10/science/transgender-teena... 5x in 13-17 vs 65 years old: https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/06/10/study-300000-youth-ages-13-17-identify-as-transgender-in-the-us/ https://www.losangelesblade.com/2022/06/10/study-300000-yout...

magicalist 4y ago
- nomel 4y ago
  I'm sorry, but it's not that simple. Transitioning should start before puberty, for best outcome. There's no way to not "think of the children" since the best outcome requires children: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31682347/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31682347/
  - mike00632 4y ago
    Delaying puberty isn't "transitioning". You mentioned hormone blockers so you seem to have some knowledge which makes me think that you are intentionally misrepresenting what is happening in order to deny medical care to trans children. Despicable.
    - LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
      How do children who exhibit behaviors that the doctors and parents stereotype as opposite-sex benefit from having their natural development blocked with and/or overwhelmed with opposite-sex hormones? Most parents are fine with gender non-conforming children (in the parent's mind of course - the kid is just being themselves). It's not a panic for them to ask why modifying their child's body to match their toy choice is so important.
      - mike00632 4y ago
        1. Many parents are not fine with trans children. By suggesting that trans children are welcome you are ignoring the very real problems that the Conservative monsters are currently inflicting on them. 2. They benefit from having extra time to make a decision. When you (unnaturally, via the force of law) block children from receiving medical care then you cause them to develop sex characteristics that don't belong to them. If you think about it, you are doing to these children much worse than anything you are suggesting trans advocates are doing.

LawTalkingGuy 4y ago

> And you have some feminists that exclude trans women. No "trans woman" is ever a woman. They're men, males. You're trying to take women's rights from females by denying them a way to uniquely identify themselves. This right here is why "trans rights", as activists choose to define it, can never happen. If you can take the words woman and female, Germany could redefine Jew and China can redefine Uighur, and everyone could identify as black-descendant-of-slavery to access scholarships.

mpalmer 4y ago
You're trying to take women's rights from females by denying them a way to uniquely identify themselves. Rights are not a zero-sum game or some kind of exhaustible resource; I have no idea what you're getting at with this. I challenge your contention that "a way to uniquely identify themselves" is a right of biological women or other groups. Never heard of any such right; it sounds totally made up. --- The meaning of words is what all people agree on. In the US, marriage used to mean a legally recognized union between a man and a woman of the same race. Otherwise it was miscegenation, or sodomy. Then as times changed, they added a qualifier: "mixed marriage" or "mixed-race marriage". Same thing happened in the last decade with gay marriage. In both cases, it eventually just turned back into marriage again. You disagree that trans women are women. Fine. Activists are trying to make the case that they are; that womanhood encompasses more than being biologically female, and same for manhood. A lot of people agree. --- You say that everyone could identify as black-descendant-of-slavery to access scholarships. I say you are making a laughable category error. (Did people start marrying their dogs after Obergefell was decided? They did not.) The reason someone identifies as something other than their birth gender isn't well-understood, but it is fair to say that hormones and the development of the brain play a significant role in the way people think and behave. Hormones have strong ties to sex and gender. They have very, very little to do with race. Category error. If non-black people started identifying as black to claim their piece of a societal debt to the ancestors of slaves, they would be (and have been[1]) ridiculed. Most people don't try this, because the vast majority of society agrees that is not acceptable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal
- 4y ago