Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Pronoun/Gender Wars Continue Apace


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, SteveO said:

Normally—normally— I’d agree with you.  But I figured I reach into the little chest of absurdities that people like Nehor like to think of as the woke’s weapon locker.  Next time I’ll remove half my brain so maybe I could wield it more effectively, but I think I did a pretty good job in the given situation.

I think maybe he was tapping into his white male privilege more than anything.  Maybe a dash of sexism?  And whatever apt description for the brain worms that posses an adult to compare a concerned woman about trans issues—to a wife beater.  Maybe too much time on Twitter?  Dunno.

 

It is either Twitter or people I know who have been beaten for being transgendered that inspires passion on this issue.

Who can say for sure which is the cause? Well, with Twitter on the way out at the moment hopefully we can narrow the options soon.

Oh, and what happened to your exalted exit from this thread because you are MARRIED and have a FAMILY and have better things to do? Bored of them already?

Link to comment
7 hours ago, juliann said:

Wow, I've followed a particular woman's group for years. They are the only ones fighting for women and that defines who they align with...not partisan politics. I deeply respect them and their sacrifices since the liberal women's groups abandoned women some time ago. You are really ignorant when it comes to women's groups. BTW, "terfs" are on the receiving end of violence not the giving end. Those who want to shut down women have burned down lesbian libraries, physically attacked women if they attempt to gather, and have successfully gone after their jobs. So be honest when it comes to blame. 

This one group is the only group fighting for women? Are you sure this isn’t a cult? I doubtlessly am ignorant. If there was a woman here who stepped up to the plate to counter Smac’s deliberate drama bomb I would gladly have been quieter. For some reason there aren’t a lot of pro-LGBT lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women on an LDS message board.

One area where my critics inadvertently hit close to the truth was that there was some male privilege in my defense. It probably helps me to socially survive here. It wouldn’t be conscious or deliberate but if my bisexual ex-gf (who left the church) showed up here openly I don’t think she would have lasted long. That is not a comment on her mental and emotional resilience but instead on how many arrows and stones would be thrown.

I don’t believe you that those who adhere to TERF ideology are receiving more violence from transgender activists than transgender people receive from transphobes. I have done some reading and statistics digging and haven’t found anything authentic to support that and I looked for it as part of a data collection project I worked on about a year and a half ago.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

This one group is the only group fighting for women? Are you sure this isn’t a cult? I doubtlessly am ignorant. If there was a woman here who stepped up to the plate to counter Smac’s deliberate drama bomb I would gladly have been quieter. For some reason there aren’t a lot of pro-LGBT lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women on an LDS message board.

One area where my critics inadvertently hit close to the truth was that there was some male privilege in my defense. It probably helps me to socially survive here. It wouldn’t be conscious or deliberate but if my bisexual ex-gf (who left the church) showed up here openly I don’t think she would have lasted long. That is not a comment on her mental and emotional resilience but instead on how many arrows and stones would be thrown.

I don’t believe you that those who adhere to TERF ideology are receiving more violence from transgender activists than transgender people receive from transphobes. I have done some reading and statistics digging and haven’t found anything authentic to support that and I looked for it as part of a data collection project I worked on about a year and a half ago.

…nevermind…Merry Christmas! 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

Do you remember this case? The female who was upset/alarmed was labeled a transphobe. She’s the hero of this story.

The ‘transphobic hoax’ line was passionately parroted by at least one person now posting in this thread. 

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Link to comment
12 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

The trans folk I know deeply want to pass as their preferred gender.

Have they explained why to you?  As someone who wanted to be free of gender classification when a youth (because of sexism as well as not feeling at home among or connected to females in general in many ways, the ways I felt mattered most at that time), I am curious about what seems to me to be a somewhat opposite reaction. 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Have they explained why to you?

Because the reason they transition is because they have always felt they already were gender B in a gender A body, so they want to be recognized as how they feel.  I imagine it being  like (but not compared in intensity of trauma) being old and having a face lift.  I want people to think I look great, not to think that I’m “trying” to look great.  I want to pass.  As do they. 
 

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Because the reason they transition is because they have always felt they already were gender B in a gender A body, so they want to be recognized as how they feel.  I imagine it being  like (but not compared in intensity of trauma) being old and having a face lift.  I want people to think I look great, not to think that I’m “trying” to look great.  I want to pass.  As do they. 
 

 

Amongst the accounts of many detransitioners, the realization that they can’t pass is repeatedly told in their stories as a reason they choose to return to their birth gender. I believe most trans identifying people want to pass so if, like in the California case, someone is obviously exposing themselves,  it is a red flag that maybe, something is amiss. 
 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

Amongst the accounts of many detransitioners, the realization that they can’t pass is repeatedly told in their stories as a reason they choose to return to their birth gender. I believe most trans identifying people want to pass so if, like in the California case, someone is obviously exposing themselves,  it is a red flag that maybe, something is amiss. 
 

 

I would imagine that not passing would be deeply deeply depressing.

 

Link to comment
9 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

The trans folk I know deeply want to pass as their preferred gender.  A different title wouldn’t be appealing to them. 

Thank you for your story and kindness, it is inspiring to hear about how little gestures can make such a huge difference in someone’s life.

In regards to your comment above, there are a couple schools of thought and a tension between them.  As you mention there are some who want nothing more than to covertly pass, and it is natural to want to disappear from the attention of the public eye.   Trans people who don’t pass are at greater risk of ridicule, violence, negative attention, and just unwanted attention in general.  Sometimes someone just wants to go to the grocery store unnoticed - invisible.  That is understandable.  Sometimes people just want to “fit-in” and disappear in a crowd like everyone else.  They don’t want the stares, the questions, the eyes of judgment and curiosity upon them.  That is an understandable feeling that I know all too well having two albino children.  We cannot take them ANYWHERE without all of the above experiences.  It is not comfortable feeling like a freak-show for the entertainment of others while walking through the grocery store. 

My kids are fortunate in that they can “pass” with a little extra effort if we/they want to.  We could dye their hair and put in colored contacts that don’t allow the reddish glow in certain lighting conditions.  There is also fake tanning and tinted lotions.  Being legally blind will be the hardest thing to hide.  We could go that route, or:

The other school of thought from some trans people is that they should be proud of who and what they are as trans individuals.  I love that message in this article:

https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/5gjyjq/im-proud-of-being-trans-and-i-dont-care-about-passing

This seems like the better way for mental health and self-acceptance - and ultimate public acceptance.  I think that ultimately if trans people want to be accepted for who they are as trans, then they have to first start accepting/loving themselves as trans.  By trying to “pass” as a non-trans male or female, there is the unavoidable undertone and message that there is something wrong with being trans.  Is that the message that trans people really want to portray? That seems to be in tension and conflict with the LGBTQ pride message. 

While compassion for those who have not yet fully embraced their identity as trans in full self-compassion and acceptance is warranted, I think that we all need to be advocates for a healthier paradigm.  That is the tension between the two schools of thought that trans people need to learn to reconcile and ultimately come to a realization that if they want society to accept trans people, they need to first accept that they are trans, and sometimes that means not-passing, and that should be ok for everyone.   Even those who can and do pass, should be open and honest about their trans nature in their relationships.  Hiding, isolation, and masks are not healthy.  One will never, ever, ever feel seen and loved and accepted for WHO THEY ARE in hiding and masking.  I understand that for different reasons as a recovering addict.

While fitting-in has its appeal, I think of the message that gives my kids about themselves - that there is something terribly wrong with who and what they are that needs to be hidden from public.  That their true nature needs to be hidden and covered up to be acceptable.   I don’t want to raise my children that way.  I want to help them learn healthy ways to cope with the social consequences of being “different” and not just accept their differences, but embrace them.   I think that is their best bet at good mental health and a happy, self-loving confidence despite what the world throws at them.

And hopefully, "fitting-in" someday doesn't mean that one has to "pass".  

 

 

 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
On 12/18/2022 at 10:17 AM, smac97 said:

I am strongly opposed to compelled speech, to the government using the force of law to punish people who say things the government does not want them to say, or to punish people who do not want to say things the government seeks to compel/coerce them to say (such as "preferred pronouns").

I agree. The First Amendment has helped to create a culture which values the autonomy of the human mind, which is why we bristle so in the face of compulsion.

That being said, I recognize that the right to speak also protects the right for people to say some pretty crummy things - things which others may take great offense to or even believe to be genuinely harmful (e.g., flag burning, national anthem protesting, COVID-19 vaccine misinformation, election results misinformation, pronoun (mis)usage, etc.).

Personally, I have yet to be convinced that restricting free speech is on balance more harmful than tolerating it - even though that means we will have to tolerate some fairly offensive speech from time to time. In my mind, the answer to speech that I disagree with is always the same: more speech.

 

Link to comment

The whole point of a pronoun is to be able to refer to someone or something without always using the name.

If it gets to the point that using pronouns offends someone then we might as well stop using pronouns all together. 

It might be easier to just use the name and forget the pronoun. 

Link to comment
47 minutes ago, Danzo said:

It might be easier to just use the name and forget the pronoun. 

The anti-trans crowd would simply make the same fuss and exercise their free-speech rights by showing how big of a jerk they can be by not referring to them by their preferred names.  They will refuse to call someone of the male sex "Tiffany", and will use their birth name instead.  If they don't know their birth name, they will call them "John" or "Jane" to signify their disapproval.  

That, and the fact that those who refuse to use pronouns in a way which yields to a persons gender identification would in the same way simply refuse to adapt their language in other ways. 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
7 hours ago, MorningStar said:

Cis is an annoying term that feels like a slur. 

You don’t like Latin?!? ;) 

In case you are not aware…

I forget this as soon as I look it up for some reason, I think the idea cis is an abbreviation or an acronym is stuck in my head and it pushes out the actual definition, which is it’s a Latin prefix meaning “on this side”…which I rather like….it is like it means where I am works for me, the grass isn’t greener over there so to speak, I am here right where I am meant and want to be  

When I first heard it, it reminded me of “hiss” though (as in “boo, hiss”, not “snake: hiss” which is rather cool) and therefore sounded negative, so I get why some find it annoying. “Trans” sounds like the cool kids because I think of transcendent or transporter (Star Trek variety).

Link to comment
5 hours ago, pogi said:

And hopefully, "fitting-in" someday doesn't mean that one has to "pass".  

While I assume there are fundamental differences based on why one doesn’t ‘fit’ the ideal, it does seem to tie into the all too common experience of unhappiness with one’s body, especially the appearance of it.  Someday perhaps there will be a community where there is no ideal, no “perfect” or “most desirable” body type that most compare themselves to and find themselves wanting, often even the people others see as approaching the ideal the most.  I wonder if we ever get there, if people are not only taught, but really accept that the body they have is the body they want (besides health issues) if the experience of transgender would still exist. If appearance stopped mattering and we became more about what we do and think and not what we look like, would one need to look like someone else to look like who we feel we are?

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
19 hours ago, Thinking said:

  

Thank you for your response BD. I always enjoy reading your posts.

This is the part that troubles me. Some who have decided to be called by non-traditional pronouns also want others (or all) to be called by other pronouns as well. I've heard the phrase "birthing people" used to refer to biological women. My wife is a woman. I'm not going to identify her using some other phrase.

I haven't seen that as much, but haven't delved too deep into the varying philosophies/ideals surrounding trans identities. Technically birthing people is meant to be all encompassing to include cis women, non-binary people, and trans-men. I find that I don't mind the term IF it's used in a way or acknowledges that the huge majority identify as women or ma my interchangeably use "women" after acknowleding that some who have children do not ID as such. There's not a ton of stats on how many trans/non-binary people are having kids. But however one dices it, the number is likely very small in terms of percentage of all pregnancies (I'd assume somewhere between .5 to 2%).  And in some ways the birthing people line also glosses over essential details/differences that would be good to discuss or have separate sections on focusing on specific concerns that may occur for pregnancy in this subgroup. 

It would be better to treat it like say twin/multiples births. Allow that the majority of info will fit the majority of pregnancies, but make sure to cover to some degree pregnancies that include more than one baby. Particularly in terms of discussing related health concerns that may follow. 

 

With luv, 

BD 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Calm said:

You don’t like Latin?!? ;) 

In case you are not aware…

I forget this as soon as I look it up for some reason, I think the idea cis is an abbreviation or an acronym is stuck in my head and it pushes out the actual definition, which is it’s a Latin prefix meaning “on this side”…which I rather like….it is like it means where I am works for me, the grass isn’t greener over there so to speak, I am here right where I am meant and want to be  

When I first heard it, it reminded me of “hiss” though (as in “boo, hiss”, not “snake: hiss” which is rather cool) and therefore sounded negative, so I get why some find it annoying. “Trans” sounds like the cool kids because I think of transcendent or transporter (Star Trek variety).

I don't think it sounds like a slur but I don't like it either.  Having a designation that has always been a given, and then suddenly that designation needs a qualifier "in order to be fair and inclusive" to those that aren't that designation even though they have their own designation, rubs me the wrong way.

Kind of like having someone put something extra on the beginning of my name--without asking me about it--because others don't think it's fair for me to use it without a qualifier since others have decided they want that same name too. 

The Latin doesn't really even make sense to me.  If "cis" means "this side of" and "trans" means "across from" then that would mean that biological women are across from transgender women?  Or that biological women are on this side of womanhood but transgender women are on the other side of womanhood? 

That doesn't really clear anything up.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I don't think it sounds like a slur but I don't like it either.  Having a designation that has always been a given, and then suddenly that designation needs a qualifier "in order to be fair and inclusive" to those that aren't that designation even though they have their own designation, rubs me the wrong way.

Kind of like having someone put something extra on the beginning of my name--without asking me about it--because others don't think it's fair for me to use it without a qualifier since others have decided they want that same name too. 

The Latin doesn't really even make sense to me.  If "cis" means "this side of" and "trans" means "across from" then that would mean that biological women are across from transgender women?  Or that biological women are on this side of womanhood but transgender women are on the other side of womanhood? 

That doesn't really clear anything up.

First coined in 1994 and added to Websters in 2015. It’s a relatively new designation.

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

First coined in 1994 and added to Websters in 2015. It’s a relatively new designation.

I noticed that.  When I was reading up on it most of the sites said that it was originally used in terms of geography.  Like 'this side of the ocean' or 'across from that mountain', etc.  I took an interesting dive into its usage then and now (thanks Cal for the idea). 

I don't care if people want to apply it to themselves or use it in general, but it will annoy me if it's applied to me or used in a 'if you don't use this term then you are transphobic' way.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Danzo said:

The whole point of a pronoun is to be able to refer to someone or something without always using the name.

If it gets to the point that using pronouns offends someone then we might as well stop using pronouns all together. 

It might be easier to just use the name and forget the pronoun. 

Danzo is right. I agree with Danzo. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Calm said:

cis... is it’s a Latin prefix meaning “on this side”…which I rather like….it is like it means where I am works for me, the grass isn’t greener over there so to speak, I am here right where I am meant and want to be  

Ooh, I like that!  Cis sounds like the principles of radical self-acceptance, which I love. 

3 hours ago, Calm said:

While I assume there are fundamental differences based on why one doesn’t ‘fit’ the ideal, it does seem to tie into the all too common experience of unhappiness with one’s body, especially the appearance of it.  Someday perhaps there will be a community where there is no ideal, no “perfect” or “most desirable” body type that most compare themselves to and find themselves wanting, often even the people others see as approaching the ideal the most.  I wonder if we ever get there, if people are not only taught, but really accept that the body they have is the body they want (besides health issues) if the experience of transgender would still exist. If appearance stopped mattering and we became more about what we do and think and not what we look like, would one need to look like someone else to look like who we feel we are?

Cis-age would make a great hashtag!  Maybe there would be less Botox destroying peoples beautiful natural wrinkles, smiles and character.   There is so much wisdom in that Latin concept of cis, I think. 

Good question about how that would affect trans people.  I don't know for sure, but I suspect the dysphoria they experience derives from a different etiology.   I don't think it is about looking "better" as much as wanting their external identity to match their internal identity.   That internal identity is as much a real part of them as the external identity - hence the dysphoria.  What does radical self-acceptance look like for a person in that state of opposing identities?  That is a tough question.   Cis-trans.  Sounds like a paradox, but maybe there is some wisdom in that concept somewhere, somehow.  I think that is the idea I was trying to get at above - being accepting of themselves as trans and embracing their identity as such regardless of the stage of transition they are in, to where "passing" may still be recognized as desirable (the icing), but accepting ones trans-nature (fully passing or not) is the cake.      

Because they have two conflicting identities (inner and outer/birth sex), we should be yielding to the identity that they choose to represent in their pronouns.  Who am I to choose which identity is right for them? 

 

Link to comment
13 hours ago, pogi said:

The other school of thought from some trans people is that they should be proud of who and what they are as trans individuals.  I love that message in this article:

https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/5gjyjq/im-proud-of-being-trans-and-i-dont-care-about-passing

This seems like the better way for mental health and self-acceptance - and ultimate public acceptance.  I think that ultimately if trans people want to be accepted for who they are as trans, then they have to first start accepting/loving themselves as trans.  By trying to “pass” as a non-trans male or female, there is the unavoidable undertone and message that there is something wrong with being trans.  Is that the message that trans people really want to portray? That seems to be in tension and conflict with the LGBTQ pride message. 

While compassion for those who have not yet fully embraced their identity as trans in full self-compassion and acceptance is warranted, I think that we all need to be advocates for a healthier paradigm.  That is the tension between the two schools of thought that trans people need to learn to reconcile and ultimately come to a realization that if they want society to accept trans people, they need to first accept that they are trans, and sometimes that means not-passing, and that should be ok for everyone.   Even those who can and do pass, should be open and honest about their trans nature in their relationships.  Hiding, isolation, and masks are not healthy.  One will never, ever, ever feel seen and loved and accepted for WHO THEY ARE in hiding and masking.  I understand that for different reasons as a recovering addict.

While fitting-in has its appeal, I think of the message that gives my kids about themselves - that there is something terribly wrong with who and what they are that needs to be hidden from public.  That their true nature needs to be hidden and covered up to be acceptable.   I don’t want to raise my children that way.  I want to help them learn healthy ways to cope with the social consequences of being “different” and not just accept their differences, but embrace them.   I think that is their best bet at good mental health and a happy, self-loving confidence despite what the world throws at them.

And hopefully, "fitting-in" someday doesn't mean that one has to "pass".  

While it would be great this drastically increases the likelihood of being ridiculed and/or attacked. The history of minorities shows that once an oppressed group starts to be proud of themselves there is an almost reflexive reaction from many to crush them back. In the US we had the Red Summer of 1919, the Tulsa Massacre, and many others. You see it in the contempt of pride parades which rarely have any impact on the angered except that they exist.

I like your optimism but I could see it going very badly. Your bolded “and that should be ok” is probably not the reality.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...