all 32 comments

[–]worried19[S] 24 insightful - 1 fun24 insightful - 0 fun25 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

For me, yes. I've thought about it. You'd have to be crazy not to. GC such an attacked and reviled position. I've wondered if I'm missing something. Am I just not getting the crux of the argument? I used to be more QT, after all. I think back to what made me change my views, and I still find those reasons valid.

I would love to think I'm simply misguided, but I just can't believe that I am. To me, there's just something so profoundly wrong with what's happening in Western countries. I consider myself a very ethical and moral person. I hold myself to extremely high standards. I wouldn't be GC unless I was convinced it was the correct ethical position to take. I look at what's happening right now and I believe the actions undertaken by many are immoral, especially when it comes to children and young people. That's why I hold my current stance despite the mainstream considering it worthy of denunciation.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 22 insightful - 1 fun22 insightful - 0 fun23 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

No.

I used to. I struggled with my concerns and what my gut was telling me for years. I came to the debate sub to try to be convinced that I was wrong for leaning GC, I wanted so badly for a trans person or an ally to make it make sense for me. I felt so guilty for not being able to see transwomen as women or transmen as men. But the more I engaged and the more I educated myself, the more I saw how toxic and misogynistic it was, the more I felt afraid and disgusted and disrespected, the more I heard from trans people, the more I realized how harmful, homophobic, regressive, appropriative and just illogical the trans movement is. Everything is a contradiction, they rely on pseudoscience and emotional blackmail, they silence and threaten those who hold different views, they try to force mass conversion therapy and make people reinforce their ideology instead of respecting a difference of opinion, and they speak for and over people on topics they don’t seem to understand themselves. There’s too much cognitive dissonance, too much misrepresentation, too much of a lot of things. I feel confident that I’m on the right side more and more every day. Bottom line- sex literally cannot be changed in humans, the trans community can’t make anything their claiming make sense, and the rights of one group cannot infringe upon the rights of another.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I also think, cold as it may sound, that trying to rework biology and redefine humans and sex and gender for such a significantly minute percentage of the world’s population is extreme and invasive.

[–]DistantGlimmer 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think it's really that simple. There's an old saying about how history is written by the winners and while there may be some cases where people really should have known better at the time than to support some cause usually everyone sees themselves as the heroes in their own historical narrative and how it is remembered depends on what historical narrative wins out.

Obviously, I support equal civil rights for all people and reject TRA's framing of the issue that they are an oppressed group who only wants the rights that other people have. I feel my support for gender critical activism is consistent with my lifelong support for women's rights and social justice. Of course, I have given this a lot of thought and there was a time when I first started following this issue that I wasn't too sure where I stood on it but I have heard most of the arguments from both sides and that has swayed me (in that I find only one side consistently actually makes logical and sound arguments to be honest) so even if TRA's "win" temporarily and GC is looked at even more negatively than it currently is I will have no regrets for standing by my principles.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Being looked at unfavorably by history doesn' t necessarily mean that you are wrong.

Yes, I worry that humans will choose the wrong "right side of history", but I don' t think I am wrong in the positions and opinions I have on this specific matter.

As for changing my mind, I have joined the defunct debate sub specifically because I wanted someone to give me a reason to forget my TERFy thoughts. It never happened and I can assure you that it wasn' t for lack of trying (on my part).

I will change my mind when a good argument will succeed. But I am not going to change my position while still believing in the things I believe in just because it' s hard to be criticized. There' s nothing wrong in not wanting to use certain words to describe a category of people and at the same time wanting them to have their spaces, labels, protections and so on.

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

I have joined the defunct debate sub specifically because I wanted someone to give me a reason to forget my TERFy thoughts

Same! I was desperately hoping for someone to explain how this isn't just a load of old-fashioned misogyny. After months and months of receiving nothing but that, I realised I can't keep fooling myself, much like how I couldn't stop fooling myself that men are all just misguided and a little confused, but not misogynistic.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The wrong side of history is not the one that takes away women’s rights, so no. There have always been people who look at feminism unfavourably. Fuck ‘em.

[–]divingrightintowork 15 insightful - 4 fun15 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I keep trying to ask basic questions of the other side to make sure I'm not on the wrong side and I keep getting really bad answers 😭

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Homophobic ideologies can't be "on right side of history", so no, I never had such feeling.

[–]FlanJam 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I used to be QT because I thought it was the "right side of history", but then I realized I disagreed with a lot of their views. For a while I questioned if my disagreements stemmed from transphobia, but after much contemplation I'm confident it doesn't. Generally I think the more moderate QT and GC people are alright, its the extreme ends that I'd say are "on the wrong side of history".

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

It won't be the right side of history because it's right, it'll be the right side of history because it's history: that is, whichever side dominates will become the way future people think, and then those who didn't agree will be looked back on as ignoramuses. But it could always change again - there are ancient ways of thinking that people look back on as naive or stupid, that are later rediscovered as wise or insightful...

Does history mostly bend toward justice - will the majority mostly choose the best way forward? That's a very complex issue, and with concerns about technology & ecological issues, it seems like there is a lot to argue against. I think of trans gender right next to trans human issues, and it all seems like a risk area.

Do I ever wonder if I'm wrong? Absolutely. I also worry there isn't much I can do to stop inevitable moves even if I'm still a kind of luddite at heart. That's why my biggest interest is to simply be able to have conversations and discuss the repercussions of some things done. I would rather the world doesn't just change while the majority of the population don't even realize what's happening.

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

No, the right side of history being homophobic and misogynist is a terrifying thought.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I’ve thought about it. Sometimes I’ve worried that maybe I am just like self-hating or that I can’t be rational because I have trauma involving trans people. I feel like if someone could make sense of it for me in some other way I’d probably really want to change my beliefs so I wouldn’t have to experience cognitive dissonance. It would be wonderful to be real too. I don’t think there is any way to make it makes sense though. I wish some QT person with all the answers could explain it for me though, but I don’t think they exist. I wish it wasn’t all so complicated.

[–]worried19[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You seem like the opposite of self-hating to me. It's got to be healthier to acknowledge that you're still biologically male, even though you have medically transitioned and live your life socially as a woman. Sometimes I wonder if the reason so many trans activists are so angry is because they realize the truth that they can't completely escape their biological sex, and this rage drives them to be so aggressive in demanding the rest of the world see them as indistinguishable. What are your thoughts on that?

Right before the old sub was banned, I linked to this video on Muxes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiek6JxYJLs

I have to assume this a much healthier way to be than what modern Western trans activism is pushing. These people know they're biologically male. They don't try to pass as natal women. They occupy a third space and have achieved what appears to be moderate to high acceptance in the communities in which they live.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks! I don’t feel like I’m self-hating, but that is what many trans people will say or that you have internalized transphobia.

I’m not really good at understanding it unfortunately, but your explanation makes sense. Maybe it threatens the sense of self they’ve built, so misgendering might feel like an attack. I wish there more focus on self acceptance even as someone transitions so they would understand that it doesn’t actually change your sex and learn to not demand everyone else behave a certain way for them. I feel like narcissism may be part of why some people are so aggressive. I don’t think all trans people are like that, but the loudest voices seem like maybe they are. I didn’t like the trans community for these reasons years ago and I feel like it’s only gotten worse. Earning pronouns seemed better to me, but I’ve also had it easier in that people viewed me as a girl/woman so it was never something I really focused on. I don’t think there is any way to defend forcing people to lie or change words about sex.

Thanks for sharing the video! I really love seeing any story where feminine boys are accepted and not taught they are wrong.

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

After so continuously seeing the amount of misogyny that trans ideology is based on, no. I remember when we were trying to move towards a better future by not acting like women have special ladybrains, or that your female clothing or how much you pass defines how much of a woman you are and that masculinity and femininity are damaging. It seems that for a while, we were pretty clear on these things being bad and why they're bad, and then all of a sudden, a group comes along whose argument is literally "I'll kill myself if you don't validate me using backwards misogynistic ideals" and all of a sudden the exact same things that men have been saying which were rejected by feminists started going unquestioned and being touted as "finding your true self".

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Absolutely not. We don’t have a choice to be who we are and we need a place in society that isn’t just a parade of violence and marginalization.

I don’t agree with the more extreme trans rights views but I don’t doubt the relatively moderate position I land in.

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

What exactly is your position?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Being trans is treatment for a medical condition and deserves to be protected to the same level.

This means among other things access to necessary facilities as well as job, housing, and access peotections similar to those cited in the ADA (which of course was drafted specifically to exclude trans people) including protection from harassment. Being required to use male facilities doesn’t mean this mark as it is both unsafe and a hostile environment. This also means transition should be included in insurance and public systems as it is necessary care.

This is distinct from being gender nonconforming but not trans which is fine and in fact laudable and also should be protected generally in the vein of Price Waterhouse but is a distinct thing from being trans.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Can I ask two questions?

1) this is out of curiousity, and maybe not relevant but- if being trans was treated as a medical condition (side question- would it be a mental or medical condition?) how then does the argument that you aren’t men make sense? Is your stance that people who have transitioned should then be considered neither men nor women? Asking for clarification, not to argue

And 2) are you advocating for a third space, exclusive for trans people and or trans and gnc people or anyone who’d feel unsafe in a sexed bathroom, or are you advocating for granting transwomen access to female spaces?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

1) mental but mental conditions are medical conditions, I think we are women but I don’t really care to be seen as neither, as long as it’s not men it’s okay by me.

2) Either. I will always use a third space when one is available and prefer them, but they generally don’t exist. If they were widely available I would always use them.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

1) I agree it’s mental but that mental is medical. I was just curious as I’ve seen a few people say that it’s a medical condition but not mental at all.

1a) I (personally) would be fine with transwomen socially/colloquially being classed as separate from men, but would need them to be legally classed as men or at least categorized/grouped with males/men when it comes to statistics, laws, and rights- only because I think females/women should have the right to be classed entirely without the male sex. Idk if that makes sense, I’m just saying that I think females and transwomen should be grouped separately entirely out fo fairness for my sex.

2) I think that transwomen should advocate for third spaces. I think they deserve them and the number of trans people doesn’t mean they don’t have a right to demand their own spaces. I still think that females should have a right to female only spaces. I know you say that there aren’t enough trans people to justify there being mandatory third spaces, but if equality is the goal then the numbers don’t matter- equality is what matters. So it shouldn’t matter if there’s only a small amount of trans people using those spaces- they still have a right to that space if that makes sense.

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

I don’t have a problem with separating us from natal women generally but we’ve already talked about how lumping is with men from a legal standpoint leaves trans women without necessary rights and protections.

We always circle back here but the number of trans women may not stop us from asking for separate spaces but it absolutely stops us from getting them. That kind of a retrofit is extremely expensive. No one will pay it absent a legal mandate and we will never get a legal mandate, I mean that’s exactly why we were excluded from the ADA, no one will spend that kind of money on us or accept legislation that requires it. The push has to come from non trans people or it will never happen. It’s much more acceptable to the general public to alter limits on current facilities than force people to build new ones. Money is king to the us voting public.Even of all trans resources were unified 100 percent to third spaces to the level of ignoring protecting us on every other legal from it wouldn’t pass and we have jobs and housing to worry about still not to mention trenders who are full integration or die who would fight against their own interest. It has to come from a real power block or it won’t pass.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All I meant was that, even if transwomen Arent classed with men, I don’t think it’s right or makes sense to class them with women. I think that is unfair and potentially harmful to women. As for the rest, I don’t know enough about it to comment, I just don’t think the absence of trans only spaces warrants compromising female spaces

[–]worried19[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

the ADA (which of course was drafted specifically to exclude trans people)

I had no idea about that. That's disappointing. I feel like the trans community would benefit from ADA-like provisions when it comes to matters of public accommodation. I'd support a law that required building gender-neutral restrooms and locker rooms alongside single-sex ones. We made those accommodations for disabled people. We should be able to do the same for trans people.

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

Yeah it was a compromise that was part of the original passing, language was added excluding us from protections specifically along with pyromaniacs.

[–]worried19[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I read up on it just now. I know it was 1990, but it's sad to see trans people lumped in with criminals.

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

It happens.

[–]worried19[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'm not sure if we've discussed it before, or if we have, I've forgotten. What's your stance on child transition?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Nothing medical before like 16, socially unrestricted though third spaces would be better for things like locker rooms and bathrooms for kids. And anything under 18 medically only with strict psych supervision.

[–]worried19[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I can mostly get on board with that. I still think 16 is too young, but it may be acceptable in very rare, very severe cases. I wish we could trust doctors to actually give these kids appropriate psychiatric care.

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

Do you ever wonder if you're on the wrong side of history?

No, not the way you put it. I am curious which side will win and I want the world to become saner place where saying something true/being monosexual doesn't lead to accusations of transphobia. But humans in the future looking back unfavorable on a position doesn't say anything about the morality of the position itself as what is morally right isn't defined by what future human will approve of. To put an example, if I knew future generations would be in favor of imprisoning everyone with wrinkles I wouldn't take that as moral guide, I would see that as future humans being morally wrong, and I couldn't care less about if they look back on us with disdain for not doing the same. In other words, if future people see me being on the wrong side of history I wouldn't see their opinions as being worth much as I would see them as being as on the wrong side of what is right.