Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Pronoun/Gender Wars Continue Apace


Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, bluebell said:

You've illustrate a perfect point.  A woman believing there is a difference between herself and a transgender woman is defined as "punching down" because according to some, biological women owe something to transgender women that they aren't even allowed to claim for themselves:  the right to define what a woman is.

A transgender woman has the right to define womanhood however she wants, but a biological woman doesn't.  Biological women are just supposed to shut up about it or we are the bullies.

You can both define it however you want but supporting the rhetoric of these TERFs and gatekeeping the term and spreading baseless fear about transgendered people being a threat is creating a climate of hate and is getting people beaten and killed.

https://www.hrc.org/resources/fatal-violence-against-the-transgender-and-gender-non-conforming-community-in-2022

This isn’t an accident or an unfortunate side effect of an otherwise lofty academic debate. The goal is to drive transgendered people back into hiding through the threat of violence. Similar to wife-beating to keep women in line, harassment of minorities to keep them low on the economic and social ladder, and targeted persecution of lgbt people in general to keep them closeted.

Link to comment
Just now, SteveO said:

Well, sometimes I think you’d be helped if you’re nudged into an awareness of how you come across to most people.

I’m a concerned citizen.  

Hmmmm……do tell. Please skip all this delicious foreplay just this once and tell me outright.

Demented pedant? Insufferable autodidact? Infuriating rabble rouser? Childish reprobate?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

Some of it might be that what is called a transgender woman is not really a woman to a regular heterosexual guy.  Heterosexual guys just don't want anything to do with a "transgender woman".  Any transgender who portrays themselves as a woman on a say a dating app to a hetero guy and then meet in person may end up having a very bad day. 

And there is that threat of violence. Still socially acceptable.

Edited by The Nehor
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Hmmmm……do tell. Please skip all this delicious foreplay just this once and tell me outright.

Demented pedant? Insufferable autodidact? Infuriating rabble rouser? Childish reprobate?

For my part, you come across as highly intelligent and deep-thinking.  If I knew you (in real life) I think I would like you.  While I side with Bluebell in this, I am uncomfortable not acknowledging that you make valid arguments.  
 

At the end of the day and at the risk of assuming too much, I hope for peace and reconciliation between conflicting points of view and recognition that you are, in spite of differences, still sisters and brothers united by your shared faith.

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Hmmmm……do tell. Please skip all this delicious foreplay just this once and tell me outright.

Demented pedant? Insufferable autodidact? Infuriating rabble rouser? Childish reprobate?

A deeply unhappy person.


Merry Christmas.  I have a wife and kid I need to spend time with.

 

Link to comment
36 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

. Still socially acceptable.

I don’t know if CD thinks it’s okay, but his comment is ambiguous and normalizes violence as a response even if he doesn’t approve of it, but I don’t see anyone else responding saying it is appropriate or natural to respond with violence to unexpectedly meeting a transwoman when imagining a cis woman (on the side note, I don’t have a problem myself with the label, I do believe it is important to have places both cis women and transwomen feel safe and not just are safe given many who need these spaces won’t use them if they don’t feel safe, therefore this may need to be solved in many cases by having different safe spaces).

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

And there is that threat of violence. Still socially acceptable.

That threat of violence isn't socially acceptable by most of society, and that's a very good thing that there is no good reason to downplay.  Dating violence is horrible, it doesn't matter who it's directed at.  

Link to comment
7 hours ago, smac97 said:

A few months back I posted a few comments on recent legal developments in various jurisdictions pertaining to compulsory "pronoun" usage.  I commented at length as to matters of compelled speech, orwellian re-definitions, and so on.  See, e.g., here, herehere, here.

Our Analytics responded.  See, e.g., here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here.

One of the big differences in our respective positions is that 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").  Meanwhile, Analytics seemed to broadly deny that governments are starting to pass laws, or enforce existing ones, which seek to punish "pronoun" usage (though elsewhere he seemed to approve of such laws - I'll let him address that if he likes).

I provided a number of examples of these laws here and here.  I cited instances of this happening in California, New York, Virginia, Canada, the UK, and Norway.

Here's another one from Norway that just recently came out:

The link beneath the tweet above is to this story: “Men Are Men”: Norwegian Artist Facing Criminal Charges, Potential Prison Sentence Over Gender Comments

A few thoughts/observations here:

First, I think most of the aggression in the Pronoun Wars is coming from the "T" in LGBT.

Second, there seems to be some substantial fracturing going on in LGBT coalition, with the "Ts" and the "Ls" becoming increasingly at loggerheads.

Third, I find it noteworthy that the "T" agitators are willing to punish "Ls" who do not acquiesce in the Pronoun Wars, and to use the organs of the State to do so.  This really seems to be accelerating.

"A man who claims to be a lesbian mother."

No, that's not a pitch for an SNL skit or a sitcom episode.

To paraphrase the saying (which itself is an adaptation of a line in Shakespeare's The Tempest), "resisting compelled speech makes strange bedfellows."

I, as an adult male American and a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, am wholly supportive of lesbian Norwegian filmmaker Tonje Gjevjon on this point.  

"Up to three years in prison."

For saying words.  For giving voice to ideas the government dislikes.

I think this sort of thing is going to increase in frequency and severity unless actively opposed.  Credit to Gjevjon for her efforts.

A translation of the above police notice to Gjevjon:

Yeesh.  

Alas, "being disavowed" is sometimes the price to be paid for standing by one's convictions.

I think the issue becomes substantively more problematic, though, when the government wades in and starts throwing its weight around.

"Queer organizations" can, I suppose, do as they like.  But when "politicians" start to take sides in such matters, and when they start to pass laws to compel speech or punish what ought to be Free Speech, that becomes problematic.

Anyway, back to the first article:

I have expressed concern about this phenomenon quite a few times.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is one of the most important pieces of thought in the history of the world.  It preserves, or is intended to preserve, individual liberties from encroachments and threats by the State.  I find it interesting that the Latter-day Saints owe so much to this small bit of writing, but we are far from the only ones.  I value the common ground I, as a male Latter-day Saint in Utah, share with Gjevjon, Norwegian lesbian filmmaker relative to valuing Free Speech.  This includes resisting compelled speech, and it is a concern as central to my interests as a Latter-day Saint in America as to Gjevjon's interests as a lesbian and artiste in Norway.

Thanks,

-Smac

Hi Smac,

I haven’t read all the comments so apologies if this has already been addressed. I’m trying to understand your ‘forced speech’ position and want to run this hypothetical by you. 
 

Suppose you have 6 year-old daughter who was born female and identifies as female. She uses she/her pronouns and has only heard she/her pronouns in reference to herself. 

Your daughter is in public school. Her first grade teacher uses he/him pronouns in referencing her. The teacher only mis-genders your daughter. For all other children the teacher uses the pronouns requested by the child and their parents. 
 

Your daughter is very confused and distraught by this mis-gendering. Other kids laugh at her because of it. She cries everyday when you take her to school. She says she’s afraid and wants a different teacher.

When asked why your daughter is being referenced with he/him pronouns, the teacher responds “because he is Mormon and Mormons are bigots”. 

Should the public school sanction the teacher in any way? If so, how?

Edited by Buckeye
Link to comment
2 hours ago, The Nehor said:
4 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

Some of it might be that what is called a transgender woman is not really a woman to a regular heterosexual guy.  Heterosexual guys just don't want anything to do with a "transgender woman".  Any transgender who portrays themselves as a woman on a say a dating app to a hetero guy and then meet in person may end up having a very bad day. 

And there is that threat of violence. Still socially acceptable.

I'm not for violence, or threats of violence.  I'm not for lynchings.   That said, disclosure is a crucial part of consent. When consent is not obtained and sexual activity is begun, the person who has not consented gets to defend themselves.  This is universally true, regardless of the pieces, parts, expressions, or identities of the involved parties.  One person's 'threat of violence' might just be another person's promise to defend themselves from nonconsensual sexual activity.

Here's a story that I'm making up on the spot, but pieced together from numerous stories I've heard over time, from survivors of sexual violence:

"I didn't know I was a lesbian until after I was raped by my boyfriend.  After what he did to me, it took me 2 years to take my life back.  I'll probably always have to fight the symptoms of PTSD, but I'm mostly able to avoid my triggers these days.  It took another year before I felt brave and strong enough to try dating.  I met a woman at a party named Courtney and we clicked.  We dated for a few weeks, and I decided it was time.  I invited her to my place for some drinks. Things were going well, but when things started happening, Courtney surprised my by whipping out a male organ.  I froze, but he kept coming.  I finally got it together enough to kick him between the legs and force him to limp out of my apartment.  I thought I was done being betrayed by guys.  Now I'm back in therapy, can't sleep because the nightmares are back.  I thought I was a supporter of every letter in our acronym, but what this person did was just wrong."

@The Nehor, perhaps you'd be so kind as to tell us what this woman should be charged with, and give us a range of what you'd consider an appropriate penalty under the law, for the violence she committed against a vulnerable member of the trans community.  @bluebell, feel free to chime in as well.

Edited by LoudmouthMormon
Link to comment
5 hours ago, Calm said:

I very much disagree it is the exact same situation. My guess is the vast majority of trans women who claim the label “woman” actually see themselves as women.

All kinds of unwell people believe their own lies. This in no way alters the trauma experienced by those who fall victim to their deceits. 

Link to comment
58 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

All kinds of unwell people believe their own lies.

You seriously think that there is someone producing iPhone counterfeits who believes they are producing actual, brand name iPhones?

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

You seriously think that there is someone producing iPhone counterfeits who believes they are producing actual, brand name iPhones?

Not something I’ve ever written, but one thing to be learnt from this historical moment is that the capacity for self-delusion appears as boundless as society will tolerate  

Do you seriously think that a ‘sincere’ deceiver somehow creates less trauma in the life of the deceived?

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Calm said:

I don’t know if CD thinks it’s okay, but his comment is ambiguous and normalizes violence as a response even if he doesn’t approve of it, but I don’t see anyone else responding saying it is appropriate or natural to respond with violence to unexpectedly meeting a transwoman when imagining a cis woman (on the side note, I don’t have a problem myself with the label, I do believe it is important to have places both cis women and transwomen feel safe and not just are safe given many who need these spaces won’t use them if they don’t feel safe, therefore this may need to be solved in many cases by having different safe spaces).

It is way too acceptable. I know people it happened to. In many cases there was no intent to deceive. In some cases they straight up said they were transgendered and were assaulted during or after the encounter.

I apologize for flirting with being crass with this sequence of events that is very common. Imagine a guy who has a fetish for transgender people. Generally he resists but his hormones defeats his better judgment and goes on a date or sets up a one night stand. After it is finished the attraction is gone since it was tied to a fetish and with no hormones  he is disgusted with what happened and what he chose to do. Violently disgusted. The anger is vented.

Link to comment
37 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Not something I’ve ever written, but one thing to be learnt from this historical moment is that the capacity for self-delusion appears as boundless as society will tolerate  

Then it is not “[e]xact same situation” as you stated above.

That is the only thing I was responding to.  I never stated or implied someone who sincerely believes a falsehood will cause less trauma.

Link to comment
6 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

I'm not for violence, or threats of violence.  I'm not for lynchings.   That said, disclosure is a crucial part of consent. When consent is not obtained and sexual activity is begun, the person who has not consented gets to defend themselves.  This is universally true, regardless of the pieces, parts, expressions, or identities of the involved parties.  One person's 'threat of violence' might just be another person's promise to defend themselves from nonconsensual sexual activity.

Here's a story that I'm making up on the spot, but pieced together from numerous stories I've heard over time, from survivors of sexual violence:

"I didn't know I was a lesbian until after I was raped by my boyfriend.  After what he did to me, it took me 2 years to take my life back.  I'll probably always have to fight the symptoms of PTSD, but I'm mostly able to avoid my triggers these days.  It took another year before I felt brave and strong enough to try dating.  I met a woman at a party named Courtney and we clicked.  We dated for a few weeks, and I decided it was time.  I invited her to my place for some drinks. Things were going well, but when things started happening, Courtney surprised my by whipping out a male organ.  I froze, but he kept coming.  I finally got it together enough to kick him between the legs and force him to limp out of my apartment.  I thought I was done being betrayed by guys.  Now I'm back in therapy, can't sleep because the nightmares are back.  I thought I was a supporter of every letter in our acronym, but what this person did was just wrong."

@The Nehor, perhaps you'd be so kind as to tell us what this woman should be charged with, and give us a range of what you'd consider an appropriate penalty under the law, for the violence she committed against a vulnerable member of the trans community.  @bluebell, feel free to chime in as well.

If I gave the impression that I do not think transgender people are capable of assault then let me reassure you they are capable of assaulting someone. Just like everyone else. A few of them are absolute bastards just like every other demographic. The opposite scenario where the transgender individual is the victim is more common because hatred for the transgendered is normalized and even acceptable or expected. This is not the first time I have heard hinted threats of that nature. It is a pervasive cultural agreement. The transgender individual also has much more limited recourse through the legal system and (let’s face it) reporting assault during a sexual encounter often doesn’t result in the protection of the victim or the punishment of the attacker even when the victim is not part of a largely distrusted minority.

This is akin to pointing out that women sometimes rape men. Yeah, it happens but that doesn’t make the two demographic groups equally likely to be assaulted.

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...