3 ms·

Trans is not just an extension of the gay rights movement -- it's a separate thing altogether. There are so many things that are different. Gay men will not dem

Trans is not just an extension of the gay rights movement -- it's a separate thing altogether. There are so many things that are different. Gay men will not demand others let them into areas exclusive to women _for legitimate reasons_. Toilets, housing institutions, and prisons being some. Self-identifying as another gender carries with it requirements of others far beyond simple acceptance. I don't care if I placate you or not. I'm speaking from the POV of someone from a different culture. I don't require you to accept it, just as I respect your different cultural opinions.

wizzwizz4 1y ago
Academically, gay rights come from romanticism, and trans rights come from feminism, but they're all part of the same fight: same as anti-racism, class conflict, religious pluralism, pacifism, and environmentalism. Historically, the movements have long been linked: gay folk and trans folk ran in similar circles, being trans was classified as a type of homosexuality by the medical establishment… Now that being gay is "normal", but being trans remains "abnormal", respectability politics has led to a lot of historical revisionism. These fights are a lot more related than you think. It's no coincidence that Norway's legislature has been on the forefront of gay rights, trans rights, and intersex rights wrt legal protections (or would you like to try to explain that?) – though your observations do match the relatively-late protections for bi rights, and Norway's fallen behind on protections for intersex infants. But I do appreciate your perspective, as a source of information: many things you're saying are factually incorrect, but it's important to know that some people believe them.
- simianparrot 1y ago
  I am aware of our legislation but there’s also a cultural component. Many things are technically legal but culturally uncommon. IIRC less than 2000 changed their legal gender in the last decade over here. There’s not that much of a focus on gender because it’s ok to be a feminine male or a woman with masculine traits. Personally I think this obsession with making new categories for people who don’t strictly fit some weird resurgence of classic gender roles —- like intersex —- does more harm than good.
  - wizzwizz4 1y ago
    Intersex has nothing to do with gender roles, classic or otherwise: the term refers to abnormal sexual development. Intersex rights issues include non-consensual surgical interventions on perfectly-healthy infants, which can cause pain, infertility, and other issues. Norway has not banned this. If you object to "medical interventions on underage people", then I'd suggest campaigning against this would be a better use of your time than railing against trans rights. Banning consensual, requested gender-affirming treatment that provides clear benefit to children, while allowing injurious cosmetic surgery on literal babies, is doing things the wrong way around. (Even if you turn around and get consensual gender-affirming treatment banned afterwards, that'd still better than the status quo.) > There’s not that much of a focus on gender because it’s ok to be a feminine male or a woman with masculine traits. Excellent! I approve. However, that doesn't have very much to do with transgender people. > this obsession with making new categories Is a compromise, because in other cultures that have much more rigid conceptions of gender, cultural factors prevent us from abolishing the gender system: drawing new categories around observed clustering and calling them "genders" is somewhat of a hack. (Though not without precedent: many cultures throughout history have taken this approach, usually with 3–5 genders and a lot of them ascribe spiritual significance to the non-binary genders. Orthodox Judaism is an outlier: they have unusually-many genders but ascribe negligible spiritual significance to them.) What you're seeing is probably a side-effect of multiculturalism: in this case, exporting your culture's gender non-conformity more intensely will alleviate it.
    - simianparrot 1y ago
      I am aware what intersex is. A child cannot consent to anything, so I don’t see a reason to ban medical interventions — there’s procedures involving doctors and parents before such things are considered.
      - wizzwizz4 1y ago
        I don't see any reason to do medically-unnecessary cosmetic genital surgery, which may cause infertility, on a child who can't (or doesn't) consent, for the sole purpose of "normalising" their bodies. Generally, this is considered a human rights violation (https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12795 https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12795). Children are people, not playthings.
nathan_compton 1y ago
But gay men have been and are excluded in some places from places which are viewed as exclusive to heterosexual men (for example, the army). I think you are right that trans rights presents a somewhat more radical case to the public, in the sense that people ask that their gender identity be recognized, but this is hardly either an argument against trans rights nor, really, an argument of a fundamental distinction between gay and trans rights. For example: some Americans currently deny the existence of gay people (and they view homosexual behavior as purely pathological). Thus, part of the gay rights movement is the demand that the possibility of gayness existing is real and that gayness is legitimate be recognized. This is very concordant with the trans rights struggle. You probably have heard of NAMBLA. Lots of anti-gay rhetoric focuses/focused on this extreme, frankly absurd, organization. There were elements of the gay community which defended it as well. We can repudiate NAMBLA without repudiating gay rights, but many conservative forces want us to view them as inseparable. When we allow the reactionary right to select the most absurd versions of trans rights and tell us they constitute a total repudiation of trans rights, we fall into what should be an obvious rhetorical trap. Again, if progressive people had fallen into this trap in the 70s, if gay people had allowed this rhetoric to silence them, you'd probably still be in the closet. And also, I don't know what your talk of cultural differences is supposed to accomplish. I'm an upright liberal minded modern guy, I'm not going to show up with militarized police and force you to change your mind. But cultural differences really do not compel me to respect your opinions. I respect your right to have an opinion, I can still disagree, and vehemently.

wizzwizz4 1y ago

Academically, gay rights come from romanticism, and trans rights come from feminism, but they're all part of the same fight: same as anti-racism, class conflict, religious pluralism, pacifism, and environmentalism. Historically, the movements have long been linked: gay folk and trans folk ran in similar circles, being trans was classified as a type of homosexuality by the medical establishment… Now that being gay is "normal", but being trans remains "abnormal", respectability politics has led to a lot of historical revisionism. These fights are a lot more related than you think. It's no coincidence that Norway's legislature has been on the forefront of gay rights, trans rights, and intersex rights wrt legal protections (or would you like to try to explain that?) – though your observations do match the relatively-late protections for bi rights, and Norway's fallen behind on protections for intersex infants. But I do appreciate your perspective, as a source of information: many things you're saying are factually incorrect, but it's important to know that some people believe them.

simianparrot 1y ago
I am aware of our legislation but there’s also a cultural component. Many things are technically legal but culturally uncommon. IIRC less than 2000 changed their legal gender in the last decade over here. There’s not that much of a focus on gender because it’s ok to be a feminine male or a woman with masculine traits. Personally I think this obsession with making new categories for people who don’t strictly fit some weird resurgence of classic gender roles —- like intersex —- does more harm than good.
- wizzwizz4 1y ago
  Intersex has nothing to do with gender roles, classic or otherwise: the term refers to abnormal sexual development. Intersex rights issues include non-consensual surgical interventions on perfectly-healthy infants, which can cause pain, infertility, and other issues. Norway has not banned this. If you object to "medical interventions on underage people", then I'd suggest campaigning against this would be a better use of your time than railing against trans rights. Banning consensual, requested gender-affirming treatment that provides clear benefit to children, while allowing injurious cosmetic surgery on literal babies, is doing things the wrong way around. (Even if you turn around and get consensual gender-affirming treatment banned afterwards, that'd still better than the status quo.) > There’s not that much of a focus on gender because it’s ok to be a feminine male or a woman with masculine traits. Excellent! I approve. However, that doesn't have very much to do with transgender people. > this obsession with making new categories Is a compromise, because in other cultures that have much more rigid conceptions of gender, cultural factors prevent us from abolishing the gender system: drawing new categories around observed clustering and calling them "genders" is somewhat of a hack. (Though not without precedent: many cultures throughout history have taken this approach, usually with 3–5 genders and a lot of them ascribe spiritual significance to the non-binary genders. Orthodox Judaism is an outlier: they have unusually-many genders but ascribe negligible spiritual significance to them.) What you're seeing is probably a side-effect of multiculturalism: in this case, exporting your culture's gender non-conformity more intensely will alleviate it.
  - simianparrot 1y ago
    I am aware what intersex is. A child cannot consent to anything, so I don’t see a reason to ban medical interventions — there’s procedures involving doctors and parents before such things are considered.
    - wizzwizz4 1y ago
      I don't see any reason to do medically-unnecessary cosmetic genital surgery, which may cause infertility, on a child who can't (or doesn't) consent, for the sole purpose of "normalising" their bodies. Generally, this is considered a human rights violation (https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12795 https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12795). Children are people, not playthings.

nathan_compton 1y ago

But gay men have been and are excluded in some places from places which are viewed as exclusive to heterosexual men (for example, the army). I think you are right that trans rights presents a somewhat more radical case to the public, in the sense that people ask that their gender identity be recognized, but this is hardly either an argument against trans rights nor, really, an argument of a fundamental distinction between gay and trans rights. For example: some Americans currently deny the existence of gay people (and they view homosexual behavior as purely pathological). Thus, part of the gay rights movement is the demand that the possibility of gayness existing is real and that gayness is legitimate be recognized. This is very concordant with the trans rights struggle. You probably have heard of NAMBLA. Lots of anti-gay rhetoric focuses/focused on this extreme, frankly absurd, organization. There were elements of the gay community which defended it as well. We can repudiate NAMBLA without repudiating gay rights, but many conservative forces want us to view them as inseparable. When we allow the reactionary right to select the most absurd versions of trans rights and tell us they constitute a total repudiation of trans rights, we fall into what should be an obvious rhetorical trap. Again, if progressive people had fallen into this trap in the 70s, if gay people had allowed this rhetoric to silence them, you'd probably still be in the closet. And also, I don't know what your talk of cultural differences is supposed to accomplish. I'm an upright liberal minded modern guy, I'm not going to show up with militarized police and force you to change your mind. But cultural differences really do not compel me to respect your opinions. I respect your right to have an opinion, I can still disagree, and vehemently.