QT/Trans/TRA - What reciprocal courtesy or labor do you extend to GC who will honor your pronouns? (but everyone can comment)

submitted by divingrightintowork from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]firebird 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Those aren't actually replacements in the literal sense, but I'll respond to them anyway.

Person

Everyone is a person. Of course it's the safest option available and maybe it's good enough for you and me, but I've encountered plenty of people who aren't satisfied with neutral options. I've also seen it used as the non-binary alternative for man or woman.

trans woman, transgender woman, hell even transwoman

Maybe it's because I'm a non-native speaker but I simply don't see the distinction. Don't they all mean the same?

transexual is a gross term

Not all trans people agree on that though. Who should I even follow on this?

They know it will be taken as an insult and know it will be hurtful. To still sue it is willful harm

Again, if people have to stop using it, a debate on this topic simply can't happen. People have to simply give in on a certain point without even being able to discuss that, and I simply don't think that's right especially not since it is based on someone's personal feelings and opinions on the matter.

whatever polish you wish to put to it

You are dismissing other people's concerns, lived experiences, what they wish to talk about in this debate and actual, real concepts as "polish". If you want to come across like wanting debate and not like you just want people to do as you want them to do, then this is not the way to go about it.

I would rather be called a deviant freak than a man.

You'll have to explain this one to me. You'd rather be called something that is always an insult, than something that is just a descriptive term for half the world's population?

Edit: Wanted to quickly add a reply to your comment further down the thread: It's honestly a bit weird to tell people what they should be insulted by, and say that someone who simply does not agree with you must be filled with self-hatred. So far you haven't even provided any objective arguments, it's all subjective and based on feelings.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Maybe it's because I'm a non-native speaker but I simply don't see the distinction. Don't they all mean the same?

It’s nuanced trans women can be seen as a short form of transgender woman or an emphasis of the trans umbrella. Transgender woman is more neutral, transwoman is a something some gc people started to not call us men but make a point of not having the space so trans isn’t just treated as a “type of woman” but a separate thing.

Not all trans people agree on that though. Who should I even follow on this?

We all agree it’s better than man.

Again, if people have to stop using it, a debate on this topic simply can't happen. People have to simply give in on a certain point without even being able to discuss that, and I simply don't think that's right especially not since it is based on someone's personal feelings and opinions on the matter.

I’ve given you multiple alternatives. If you can talk about gay men without calling them fags, you can talk about trans women without calling them men.

You are dismissing other people's concerns, lived experiences, what they wish to talk about in this debate and actual, real concepts as "polish". If you want to come across like wanting debate and not like you just want people to do as you want them to do, then this is not the way to go about it.

If someone can’t make the base level courtesy of not calling me something they know very well I consider a Prime and powerful insult, I don’t want to debate them. It won’t be fruitful or civil so what’s the point?

You'll have to explain this one to me. You'd rather be called something that is always an insult, than something that is just a descriptive term for half the world's population?

100 percent. There is no statement that isn’t demonstrably false you could call me that I would be more insulted by than man. That’s my point.

[–]firebird 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

It’s nuanced

You don't say. For what it's worth, I don't see the point in general, so GC people wanting to make the distinction there is also beyond me.

We all agree it’s better than man.

Did all of you have a big convention?

If you can talk about gay men without calling them f*gs, you can talk about trans women without calling them men.

Not the same thing.

If someone can’t make the base level courtesy of not calling me something they know very well I consider a Prime and powerful insult, I don’t want to debate them. It won’t be fruitful or civil so what’s the point?

Debates are important if a big group of people with different views ever want to get somewhere. What do you think the point of a debate is?

100 percent. There is no statement that isn’t demonstrably false you could call me that I would be more insulted by than man. That’s my point.

Just repeating your point isn't a helpful explanation.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Not the same thing.

It is the same thing.

Debates are important if a big group of people with different views ever want to get somewhere. What do you think the point of a debate is?

The point is if they can’t do the basic, basic courtesy of not being openly and antagonistically insulting, it won’t ever get anywhere.

Just repeating your point isn't a helpful explanation.

What would you like explained. There’s nothing you could call me that wasn’t obviously factually wrong that would insult me more than man. Ugly, idiotic, degenerate, freak. Name a thing that isn’t saying I hurt someone directly and it will be less insulting than man.

[–]firebird 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

It is the same thing.

A slur exclusively used to express hate of a certain group is not the same thing as a term based on a concept that exists across multiple species.

The point is if they can’t do the basic, basic courtesy of not being openly and antagonistically insulting, it won’t ever get anywhere.

That's not what is happening here. What is happening is that you want people to stop using words that are of vital importance to the debate just because you have certain feelings around it. What you are saying is "I only want to have a debate about this when there is no longer a debate to be had".

What would you like explained.

I wanted to know why a term designed to hurt people who are different in some way is more pleasant to you than a term that's merely a description of a concept that simply exists in the world. "Deviant freak" is inherently negative, while "man" is neither positive nor negative.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

A slur exclusively used to express hate of a certain group is not the same thing as a term based on a concept that exists across multiple species.

Calling a trans woman a man is every bit as hateful.

That's not what is happening here. What is happening is that you want people to stop using words that are of vital importance to the debate just because you have certain feelings around it. What you are saying is "I only want to have a debate about this when there is no longer a debate to be had".

No what is happening here is I’m saying something is a massive insult. Don’t call me that. And you are saying “ well I’m going to call you that because it’s not an insult because I say it isn’t. And how dare you try to control my speech.”

Any other label on any other group in that scenario and you would readily agree that the person using the objectionable term was in the wrong. You can’t have civil discourse with people who can’t even give basic courtesy of not openly insulting you.

Man is negative in context. As negative as possible. It is at once a denial of agency, a demand we define ourselves by our sex, a challenge to the legitimacy of trans people at all, a call to behave properly as our sex, an intended insult, an effort to do mental harm by triggering dysphoria, and defining by an unpleasant medical history or at best body image issue.

There’s nothing reasonably applicable that you could call me that would be more hurtful.

[–]firebird 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Calling a trans woman a man is every bit as hateful.

That would mean that hatred is the intent if using that word, like it is with the homophobic slur you gave as an example. It isn't.

And you are saying “ well I’m going to call you that because it’s not an insult because I say it isn’t. And how dare you try to control my speech.”

Not what I was saying. Not sure why you care about the nuance of the absence or presence of a space between trans and woman, but when it comes to my words you can throw all nuance out the window and twist it into anything you like.

Any other label on any other group in that scenario and you would readily agree that the person using the objectionable term was in the wrong.

Not "any other label". Labels specifically designed to harm people. I'm sure plenty of people consider "fat" to be an insult, but I wouldn't automatically label someone using the label to be in the wrong.

You can’t have civil discourse with people who can’t even give basic courtesy of not openly insulting you.

If one side needs that word to be able to voice their perspective, you can't just call it an insult and blame the other side for not being able to have a debate. You make the entirety of the debate on this topic impossible based on the grounds of something entirely emotional.

It is at once a denial of agency

You can't deny something that wasn't there to begin with. You have no agency when it comes to sex, and TRAs keep saying that there is no agency involved in gender either.

a demand we define ourselves by our sex

Sex is important in some ways, and when it comes to those ways, it is important to define people by sex, yes.

a challenge to the legitimacy of trans people at all

How so? A transgender person is transgender because of their sex. That's the whole point.

a call to behave properly as our sex

That's the exact opposite of what GC people call for.

an intended insult

It's not, I told you a hundred times before. You may consider it an insult yourself, but that does not make it an intended insult.

an effort to do mental harm by triggering dysphoria

Again, assuming that there is some harmful intent behind someone using the word 'man', instead of thinking that maybe they have something bigger than that they're trying to say.

defining by an unpleasant medical history or at best body image issue

Then you should have an issue with the term "trans woman" as well.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

That would mean that hatred is the intent if using that word, like it is with the homophobic slur you gave as an example. It isn't.

It is. You don’t call someone something they find that insulting on accident or without malice.

Not "any other label". Labels specifically designed to harm people. I'm sure plenty of people consider "fat" to be an insult, but I wouldn't automatically label someone using the label to be in the wrong.

So you are fine with someone calling someone fat even though they know they would prefer not to be addressed that way?

You make the entirety of the debate on this topic impossible based on the grounds of something entirely emotional.

No you make the debate impossible because you refuse even basic courtesy of not openly insulting the opposite side.

Then you should have an issue with the term "trans woman" as well.

Not at all. It’s my present and I embrace it. You want me defined by a deeply unpleasant past.

I’ve given you seven reasons why it’s an insult. You asked for an explanation and there it is. You know very well it’s an insult to call a trans women a man. Every time. 100 percent. You just don’t care. And whatever you are a free person, but you can’t expect beneficial dialogue when you openly insult the other people involved.

[–]firebird 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

It is. You don’t call someone something they find that insulting on accident or without malice.

Just because you have decided this, doesn't make it so. Take me as an example. ESL. Did not know the importance of a simple space. Could have called someone a "transwoman" without knowing that they found it to be incredibly insulting.

So you are fine with someone calling someone fat even though they know they would prefer not to be addressed that way?

If it's the truth, then yes.

No you make the debate impossible because you refuse even basic courtesy of not openly insulting the opposite side.

We have been debating this one word that you consider an insult the entire time, and I have not used it against you once. I have done you this 'courtesy', now you do me one by not accusing me of things I obviously didn't do.

Not at all. It’s my present and I embrace it. You want me defined by a deeply unpleasant past.

I don't "want" to define you by anything. None of use have a choice in this, we're all defined by the exact same thing.

You know very well it’s an insult to call a trans women a man.

So you're accusing me of lying.

You just don’t care.

Stop assuming what other people think and feel. You're obviously not good at it.

And whatever you are a free person, but you can’t expect beneficial dialogue when you openly insult the other people involved.

Again, I have not used this word you consider an insult against you, even though I don't agree that it's an insult. Still, I haven't gotten a beneficial dialogue. Instead you have accused me multiple times of things I did not say or do. Clearly, you agree that this is not my fault because I have played by the rules. The only other person left in this conversation is you.

[–]divingrightintowork[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Hi Firebird! I haven't seen you around here - Circling was otherwise known as Masksbehindmasks, they eventually got banned on the old GCdQT sub for reasons I don't entirely agree with - but as you can tell they're quite unhappy and self absorbed and are incapable of empathy or understanding/connecting with other lines of thinking. Just don't get too caught up with them :)

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Could have called someone a "transwoman" without knowing that they found it to be incredibly insulting.

Many wouldn’t. I don’t mind certainly. But generally most prefer trans women to transwoman.

We have been debating this one word that you consider an insult the entire time, and I have not used it against you once. I have done you this 'courtesy', now you do me one by not accusing me of things I obviously didn't do.

And that’s why I am still talking to you. If you had called me a Man I would have just said goodnight and muted the post.

I don't "want" to define you by anything. None of use have a choice in this, we're all defined by the exact same thing.

I certainly hope not. If I thought I was stuck being defined by who I was born I would have simply killed myself rather than transition. I refuse to let the accident of birth define me in the world Espescially when it is so deeply objectionable.

So you're accusing me of lying. You just don’t care. Stop assuming what other people think and feel. You're obviously not good at it.

If you know someone is insulted by a term and use it anyway you must not care. Otherwise you wouldn’t use the term. You can make excuses or spin reasons but at its core you are choosing to knowingly hurt someone and that is an act without care.

Again, I have not used this word you consider an insult against you, even though I don't agree that it's an insult.

I didn’t say you had. This is the indefinite you. As in “One cannot expect” not you personally. As I said above if you have called me a man we wouldn’t still be talking. But you are defending the position. I’ve explained to you both that it is harmful and why. You continue to defend its use. How does that not speak to a lack of care?