QT but all can comment - How would you refute the argument that The phrase "transwomen are women" presupposes that there is a cultural role for women to fill?

submitted by DistantGlimmer from (self.GCdebatesQT)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

So someone who identifies as a 5 years old should be respected and treated as a 5 years old? Someone who identifies as a doctor should be respected and treated as a doctor? Someone who identifies as a star should be respected and treated as a star? Someone who identifies as a disabled person should be treated and respected as a disabled person?

[–]transwomanHesitantly QT? 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (26 children)

We're talking about gender. Age, profession, and disabilities are observable realities (just like sex is).

Gender is not based in observable realities, it is an arbitrary construct designed with oppressive intentions. Therefore, we can redefine it and eventually eliminate it.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (25 children)

Age, professions and disabilities all have similar arbitrary constructs like gender, ageism (younger and older people are useless and not worthy of respect), ableism (people with disablities are less able than able-bodied people) and classism (that includes elevating people who have a certain job and vilifying people who have others).

They are all based on observable realities and social constructs designed to keep down certain categories were created.

Race is another thing that was made in the same way: race is to etnicity what gender is to sex.

Sexual orientation? Same. Do you think that pretending that anyone can be a lesbian has somehow destroyed homophobia? We are now at a point in which lesbians are told that they are bigots if they don' t accept males as sexual partners. Great job!!! Why is it that I am supposed to believe that pretending that men can be women will be more successfull?

[–]transwomanHesitantly QT? 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (24 children)

Yeah, so eliminate ageism, not age. Eliminate classism, not jobs. Eliminate ableism, not disabilities. Eliminate race, not ethnicity. Similarly, eliminate gender, not sex.

Sexual orientation? Same. Do you think that pretending that anyone can be a lesbian has somehow destroyed homophobia? We are now at a point in which lesbians are told that they are bigots if they don' t accept males as sexual partners. Great job!!! Why is it that I am supposed to believe that pretending that men can be women will be more successfull?

This is a bit off topic, but okay. I already pointed out that sex and therefore sexual orientation is not what I would like to change. Gender is what I would like to change.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (23 children)

Yeah, so eliminate ageism, not age. Eliminate classism, not jobs. Eliminate ableism, not disabilities. Eliminate race, not ethnicity. Similarly, eliminate gender, not sex.

Which I completely agree with. But how do you plan to do it? Because right now, the plan TRAs are pretending to have is that if we respect gender as a sacred thing, it will somehow go away. Explain to me the logic of it or give me your alternative plan to reach that point.

I already pointed out that sex and therefore sexual orientation is not what I would like to change.

The point I am making is that the plan you seem to have is that everyone should be able to call themselves whatever they want because somehow this will lead to the destruction of the thing they identify as. Right now, however, we are there, in which we have, for example, dudes in a relationship calling themselves lesbians and being validated instead of being attacked for sexism, homophobia and appropriation. Because identification is seen as something nobody should criticize.

And yet, that "brilliant" plan led us to have female-only attracted females being called fetishists and bigots for their sexual orientation. Because it' s not working to destroy it, it not only is supporting gender, it crucifies the people who don' t respect the same bullshit and don' t play along with it.

So, once again, what is the plan?

[–]transwomanHesitantly QT? 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (22 children)

Which I completely agree with. But how do you plan to do it? Because right now, the plan TRAs are pretending to have is that if we respect gender as a sacred thing

Yeah I don't care about TRAs, anyone demanding we change laws or redefine sex terminology is an idiot and I'll call them out of that crap.

I don't think we shoud treat gender as "sacred". I believe that social constructions are intended to provide us with a level of socual utility in the real world. For example, while age is technically a social construction (but still based in a characteristic of reality), we use it because it provides us with a level of social utility which justifies our usage of it. I don't think gender in its current state provides such a purpose at all.

While self identification of gender still isn't the end goal, it certainly is an improvement upon (and provides more social utility than) the oppressive force gender is today. People are free to pick a gendered label which they feel most closely represents them. However, as soon as this starts being reflected in law, I oppose it. As soon as it starts redefining sex rather than gender in any capacity, I oppose it. That being said, I do support the social redefinition or gender (but not sex or sexual orientation).

Right now, however, we are there, in which we have, for example, dudes in a relationship calling themselves lesbians and being validated instead of being attacked for sexism, homophobia and appropriation. Because identification is seen as something nobody should criticize.

Yeah that's bad. If it makes you feel any better about this discussion, I will openly admit that I am a homosexual male. There we go, I don't desire to redefine sex or sexual orientation. I'll oppose anyone who tries to do so. I don't think the concept of gender identity is flawed, but that it's current advancement in law and it overwriting the concept of sex is incredibly dangerous and not the way to go about it. It should be something reflected in social usage, not legal usage or in relation to sex.

All that being said, it would be cool if we could talk about this idea itself rather than TRAs, who are vehemently in opposition to the idea I am proposing.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

which they feel most closely represents them

Yeah, but based on what? How can I feel which gender mostly represents me?

RIght now, it' s those stereotypes and roles, but if the goal is to create a World where gender/sex roles don' t exist, what would lead someone to identify as a woman or as a man?

This is what I don' t understand, gender only exists because of those gender/sex roles, if we ever reach a point in our society where these things don' t exist, there won' t be a need for self-id to begin with, because the only thing left would be the reality of sex.

[–]transwomanHesitantly QT? 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (20 children)

Yeah, but based on what? How can I feel which gender mostly represents me?

Feelings. That's it, it doesn't need an explanation, just like if I asked why you liked a certain type of music the more I asked "Why?" about the specifics of your music preferences, it would become unexplainable.

there won' t be a need for self-id

Well that's up for society to decide, right, based on what social utility gender as a manner of identification offers people. I would say the impracticalities of having feelings-based gender would ultimately lead to it becoming less used over time (as you said, why have these labels if they aren't useful to socially classify individuals?).

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

Feelings. That's it, it doesn't need an explanation, just like if I asked why you liked a certain type of music the more I asked "Why?" about the specifics of your music preferences, it would become unexplainable.

My preferences in music don' t need to be acknowledged or respected by anyone, though. Me preferring heavy metal over raggae doesn' t bring any kind of obligations or niceties coming from other people.

But a person identifying as a woman not only asks/requires third parties to play along, they also seek inclusion in social gatherings limited to women. I am sure you are the kind that goes "whatever, do what you want", but if I have to pretend that a man is a woman, I want an explanation about what makes him identifying as a woman, so that I can decide, based on that explanation, whether or not I am willing to play along. I can' t accept "because I say so" as an explanation. That' s the same thing they are doing now.

I would say the impracticalities of having feelings-based gender would ultimately lead to it becoming less used over time

But as I said, those impracticalities already exist, and in the past few years this insanity not only stayed, it decuplicated and reorganized on other subjects. Not to mention, it became even more militant than it was before. Why do you think this is going to change?

[–]transwomanHesitantly QT? 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

My preferences in music don' t need to be acknowledged or respected by anyone, though

Let's not pivot from the original point. You asked what it was based on, and I provided you the explanation: feelings. If it "feels right" for a person to identify as mayonnaise-gender, awesome. Socially speaking, let's regard them as such. No harm involved.

But a person identifying as a woman not only asks/requires third parties to play along, they also seek inclusion in social gatherings limited to women.

Well, I would advocate for spaces and gatherings exclusive to females, making it explicitly and clearly based on sex. Because a female could identify as mayonnaise-gender, and they still need a place to pee and would still need social support/resources for being female. In other words, a male identifying as a woman would not allow her to have access to exclusively female spaces/gatherings.

pretend that a man is a woman

Well no, if we live in a society which uses self identification as a basis for gender, then that "man" would indeed be a woman. No pretending involved.

I can' t accept "because I say so" as an explanation. That' s the same thing they are doing now.

Not really the same thing though. What's happening now is gender identity becoming part of law and sex being redefined, which is not my position.

Also, why can't you accept it? Perhaps it's because we live in a gendered society that places an expectation on individuals that you must be or act a certain way in order to be one gender or another.

I presume you're a gender abolitionist (essentially the only valid feminist position regarding gender). If that's the case, pragmatically speaking, it would be far better to live in a society with identity-based gender rather than one with expectation-based gender, as one is far closer to the goal of gender abolition than the other, and clearly offers a level of social utility to the happiness, well-being, and productivity of individuals. Gender abolition will take centuries. If that's the case, why not make it as useful as possible to people in the meantime?

Why do you think this is going to change?

The reason it has is because of the insanity over redefining sex and legislating self identification laws; in other words, things that are not intrinsic to self identification of gender.

Once again, I don't care what the current standard is, as that's not my current position. I've only advocated for the social transformation of gender to that of gender identity rather than gendered associations and expectations. I've said nothing about law or about redefining sex which are demands of TRAs and not myself.