The legitimacy or illegitimacy of self-identification as the opposite sex (more colloquially but incorrectly known as "gender identity") aside, distinguishing between the sexes is justified, but distinguishing between trans-women & men isn't

submitted by SnowAssMan from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (22 children)

I have nothing in common with men.

Physiologically hormone differences represent substantial physical differences.

Socially we have neither the same aims nor the same rights or economic or social power. I can’t even stand to be in the same room with a cis man.

You can argue we aren’t women and still be at least reasonable but arguing that trans women are not different from cis men is actual nonsense.

[–]comradeconradical 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

I agree that hormone treatment and SRS can alter some transwoman to lower male physical levels of strength, but a transwoman in general is always stronger than the average woman and has none of the physical reproductive organs or stature than biological women have.

So, transwomen may not be 'men' by the gender term, but they are still 'male'. Secondary sex characteristics like breasts that don't function to feed a baby are purely aesthetic in transwomen and don't make them female. Transwomen and women also don't have the same economic or social concerns as they are not the same.

Transwomen are not female, and thus to call them women is to reduce womanhood to gender norms, which is detrimental to female rights. Transwomen are not men either, despite being male. They are transwomen.

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (20 children)

FYI:

Trans women can breast feed. Not as easily as cis women but they can't. Saying their breast are purely asthetic isnt correct.

[–]comradeconradical 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

The liquid discharge that some male nipples secrete is not breast milk and will not nourish a baby.

It's not comparable and fallacious to compare the two. Transwomens' breasts are indeed purely aesthetic.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The fact that there are multiple men out there trying to feed a baby with their man-nips is vomit inducing. A baby being used in a fetish.

[–]comradeconradical 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's honestly madness.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Quetzals post is honestly peaking material.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2161151-transgender-woman-is-first-to-be-able-to-breastfeed-her-baby/

I feel like it’s sort of a weird thing to do (especially in that case since the child’s biological mother was their partner and perfectly capable of doing that without medical intervention), but there was a article about it awhile back. I don’t really think that matters for whether someone considers transwomen to be women though.

[–]comradeconradical 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Ahhhh so this one trans person required an intense experimental medical regimen to produce nowhere near the amount or content that a woman produces, has unknown effects on the trans person and the child, and has not had its nutritional content verified. The article even says this practice is not recommended.

This is not something that naturally happens like with a female, and I wouldn't feed my child with this male lactation. In fact, the transwoman in your article didn't even feed their kid with it.

I think my point still stands, that for all intents and purposes the secondary sex characteristics that transwomen develop are not linked to female reproductive capacity, the very reason there characteristics exist in the first place. In transwomen they are largely if not entirely aesthetic, how could they not be?

A transwoman will never have to worry about the same sex-related issues that a woman will. As for gender stereotypes, these (unfortunately) arose because of sex differences. Yes, passing transwomen will likely experience some forms of misogyny. But they can never experience the full scope of being female.

I don't think it's wrong to say transwomen are transwomen, not women, as we clearly have different life experiences and challenges, both psychologically and physically.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Okay, I think we basically agree. I just wanted to make that small correction. Transwomen’s experiences are that and I aren’t going to be the same as females even if there some shared experiences (if someone passes). It can be it’s own thing and I feel like that is fine. It’s hard not to feel a little hurt if your body is reduced to some purely aesthetic thing though. I’m a person whose body does the same things for them that other people’s do, except for reproduction. I understand the point you are making though.

[–]comradeconradical 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I see your perspective too and it was interesting to read the article. I just don't really understand why many transwomen seem to think they literally are women indistinguishable from female women, because females are indeed oppressed throughout the world according to sex, and no amount of self-identification or medical treatment will truly change this. I understand the dysphoria of wanting to be the opposite sex, but that doesn't mean sex is arbitrary and doesn't exist beyond gender presentation.

I'm not quite sure what your point is by saying your body does what everyone else's does except reproduction. Because yes, regardless of sex, we are all human beings with certain capacities. Healthy, we are able to move and eat, etc. But, it is sex capacities that differentiate between males and females, measurably. And these differences in sexual functioning are base to our experiences in our society.

Also, a woman who gets a breast job does so for aesthetic purposes, as does a transwoman. In either case they both have functional human bodies. Is it hurtful to say this surgery or hormonal treatment is aesthetic? Isn't it just truthful? It may make both feel better, which is good and is their choice and their right, but that doesn't mean it's not about aesthetics.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

It’s not about aesthetics though. I’m way uglier having transitioned. So from an aesthetic standpoint it would have been a pure negative. However I am much happier and more comfortable in my body. It’s a matter of mental health not aesthetics and treating it like a breast augmentation is at best dismissive.

[–]comradeconradical 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Aesthetics doesnt mean beautiful.

You prefer the aesthetics of a female-looking body. The shape of having breasts rather than a flat chest.

The women who get breast augmentation also do so due to body issues and adverse effect on mental wellbeing. I can turn it around and say you sound dismissive of them.

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

It's not fallacious. I don't expect you to know of the case where a trans woman was able to breast feed [after a strict hormone regiment, but that's to be expected]. But Id expect you to be curious and Google search, before calling bullshit.

[–]comradeconradical 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

lmao I did google 'male nipple discharge' which can be caused by low testosterone, and is still not breastmilk.

And the experimental trans lactation that occurred in one case is not breastmilk either and was not recommended for infant consumption. More interesting and relevant I think would be to look at non-mother females who are induced to breastfeed. Would even they have the proper breastmilk to feed a baby, having never given birth? Because if you didn't know, women lactate after giving birth, which involves massive hormonal fluctuations and biological triggers.

I'd expect you to actually care about the nutrients we feed babies when considering the functionality of breasts. But, I'm always vigilant when hearing trans people talking about lactation, because if you weren't aware, it's at the very worst a fetish that comes up often enough along with menstruation simulation.

In summary, yeah I still don't see how you can consider a transwomen's breasts as actually functional beyond aesthetics :)

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Not sure where you got the "not recommended for infant consumption" part from. No article I can find on the subject mentions that. Actually quite the opposite.

Maybe we're talking different cases? Mine is from. 2018. Best article is in the NYT. Also male nipple discharge may not be the best term to Google this topic.

[–]comradeconradical 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, the one from 2017 says its not recommended for infant consumption, and the one from 2018 says it's unknown if it has the same nutrients as female breast milk. And considering how transwomen are on a steady diet of artificial hormones, which would go into the milk if it's actually anything like real breastfeeding, then no one in their right mind would feed a baby with it.

Not sure where you're getting "quite the opposite", because the only positive discussed is for the transwomen who want "the full woman experience" which is cringey enough in itself and has nothing to do with infant care.

To reiterate my main argument here because we clearly won't agree on this subtopic: medical treatment does not change sex. Transwomen are not women nor are they men. They are male, and they are transwomen. They can never be female or know what that truly entails. There are measurable differences between the sexes and these are important to consider regarding health and law.