QT: questions about transphobia (But gc feel free to add questions)

submitted by loveSloaneDebate King from self.GCdebatesQT

I read through the “Superstraight” post and I have questions about why somethings are considered transphobic. I’m just gonna list them, I don’t have a point to make, I’m just curious.

  1. Why is it transphobic to not want to sleep with/date a trans person (pre or post op)?

  2. Why is saying transwomen are men/not women or transmen are women/not men transphobic, as opposed to a difference of opinion/political view?

  3. Why is it transphobic (as opposed to technically accurate) to describe relationships with trans people in a definitively accurate way (meaning saying a TW with a woman is a heterosexual relationship, or a TM with a woman is a homosexual relationship, for example)?

  4. Why is refusal to use pronouns, particularly if the reason is just that you don’t believe in or agree with the ideology, transphobic? And would it be transphobic to compromise by using they/them, instead of sexed pronouns?

  5. Why is opposition to putting adolescents on blockers transphobic?

  6. Why is the female sex wanting spaces, sports, etc to themselves for reasons based on safety and equality considered transphobic?

  7. Why is wanting a word/phrase (superstraight/gay/lesbian/bi) that clearly explains your fixed sexuality (which would simultaneously be accepting of the idea that a TW and woman is a lesbian relationship or a TM and a woman is a hetero relationship, just not a “super” one) transphobic?

  8. Aside from the above, what else is transphobic, and why?

obligatory not all trans people say these are transphobic things

There are others I’m sure I’ll think of or gc will comment, and I’ll edit later if they come up, this was just a random question I had.

top 100 commentsshow all 129
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (113 children)

1) it's not, really.

2) they're not mutually exclusive. A racist is still a racist, and his opinions are still opinions.

3) a guy who isn't attracted to men but attracted to TW is straight, or straight-adjacent, or etc. You can call it whatever you want in your head to affirm your own worldview, i don't really care. Just don't go shouting from the rooftops about a sexuality you think my husband and other people have that they don't have.

4) Regardless of how you feel about them, misgendering will always be seen as an action performed to denigrate trans people. Honestly, even I don't believe you if you say it's not about being mean it's just about 'being right'. That's the kind of rhetoric racists use all the time.

5) a) Dysphoria is a bitch and early transition relieves it much better than late transition. b) Access to healthcare is a human right, and your 1970s, 30 person studies 'disproving' the efficacy of transition alongside conversion therapy pushing aren't going to stop it being the most effective treatment. c) What do you think happens when emotionally unstable children are told they can't have access to healthcare they know exist? Hint, it's self-medding or suicide.

I want to talk more about early transition at some point, maybe I'll make a thread.....

6) Beyond the wild misinformation from both sides, I'm pretty militant about pre-transition use of women's spaces (don't). Other than that, sorry, I'm not putting myself at risk because of an implied threat from my existing. Sports is a harder bear to tackle, but this is why we need pre-puberty transition :)

7) Point 3. I don't think it's transphobic.

8) Hating trans people? I don't know, it's a very vague topic, and much like other ism's and phobia's, there is a lot of "I DON'T HATE x BUT" floating around that muddies the water a lot.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (55 children)

  1. Agreed

  2. This doesn’t make sense to me. A racist is a racist sure, but that isn’t related to someone saying that they believe men are male and women are female. Those are two drastically different things. A racist may say disparaging things about poc, a gc person is just saying that women are female and that that matters and shouldn’t be erased or ignored. It doesn’t come from a place of hate, it comes from fact. There’s no fact that proves TWAW is true, so I don’t get why that belief is so often compared to racism. They aren’t remotely similar.

  3. “Straight adjacent”? There are actual terms for people attracted to feminized males and females (or just feminized males- not my term, just the term I see used often, starts with a g, can’t remember it atm). So I guess to me it’s not “we think your husband has”- it’s literally that your husband would have this specific term, literally a man in a relationship with another male is not in a heterosexual relationship. I get that it may bother some people to say that, I’m asking why stating something that is true is considered transphobic? Is it just because it bothers some people? It matters to a lot of gay men and lesbians (and apparently straights) that these words used to describe their sexuality are being used in a way that is definitively incorrect. So I guess i don’t get how it’s transphobic to use the definitive meanings of words defining sexuality, but not homophobic to attempt to change the meanings rather than use (or create) a word that is accurate. There shouldn’t be value on any type of sexuality, the value that trans people place on some words seems to be the root of the issue imo

  4. As a woman, and a gc one specifically, it truly does bother me to call someone I know to be a male a woman, or to use female pronouns. It didn’t in the past, but in the last five-ten years it has begun to feel as if I’m agreeing with an ideology that is harmful to me and at times feels hateful towards my sex. To say that me refusing to speak in a way that goes against my beliefs is equal to a racist is not only wrong, it’s kind of selfish and short sighted. Pronouns are not slurs, even if they are pronouns that are sexually accurate but not preferred. It’s hard to really take your response seriously if you’re going to keep comparing people who don’t think like you and refuse to pretend they do with racists. They aren’t the same at all. It seems like you’re saying it’s transphobic to say things that are true or accurate if you don’t want to hear (or read) it, and then just comparing the people who say it to racists. But it’s not an accurate comparison. I wish we had the old Reddit sub because there were some great post about this very thing. I think it’s actually a bit racist or maybe not racist, but ignorant, to even make this comparison. It’s an insult to people who have had to deal with racism.

  5. the side effects and the amount of children/adults who started transitioning as adolescents detransitioning or realizing that they aren’t trans is enough for me to think that blockers for children are not the answer. They are not old enough to give consent and the blockers don’t just stunt puberty, they stunt a lot of other significant development. I said nothing about conversion therapy, and also didn’t say that those children shouldn’t receive any type of care or help, or be able to change other less permanent things. I said they shouldn’t be put on blockers that stunt their development in multiple ways.

  6. Even if children get put on blockers, sports being separated by sex is also a matter of equal opportunity, not just safety. And male bodies are different in ways that matter athletically before puberty. It’s not fair to take away an opportunity literally created specifically for a female so a male can be validated, even if it were safe. It’s misogynistic. As for the rest- females deserve their own safe spaces just as much as transwomen deserve a safe space of their own. However, the lack of a space for TW doesn’t mean that a female space should be taken from females. That again, is misogynistic. It’s not even just about a potential threat (and your existence has nothing at all to do with it), females should be allowed their own spaces for myriad reasons.

  7. Agreed

  8. Agreed.

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (54 children)

2&4) Apologies, but your rhetoric and the rhetoric of racists are too similar for me to separate them. Just saying the things you're saying are accurate and true doesn't make it okay. If I waltz into /pol/ and ask for proof that x race is inferior, I'll be showered with crime statistics and test scores galore. That doesn't make it right, as I'm sure it's as obvious to you as it is to me that there is more behind the curtain of out of context statistics. But the same self-applied inherent morality and right-ness is what I'm concerned about. If you can't properly address a point beyond "I'm just saying the truth", then I don't have any real way to talk with you about it, sorry.

In regards to point 2 specifically, I'm not really sure how it doesn't make sense. It is pretty clear cut, and here at least I'm not comparing your rhetoric and racist rhetoric, just pointing out that beliefs about a group of people are opinions, as well as politically charged statements. Being openly transphobic is, similarly, both opinion and transphobia.

To point 4 specifically, how do you feel about the fact that you may have unknowingly called someone born female a man or born male a woman in your day to day life? Is that something that's upsetting to think about? What about the fact that people you have never nor will ever meet have called you a "TERF"? It's true, the acronym is accurate, so how is it a slur? I didn't even call incorrect pronouns slurs, by the way, don't know how you got there, I just said it comes from a place of transphobia.

NOTE: I understand being compared to racists is upsetting. I try my hardest not to make allegories, because of how that can be construed, but direct analogies aren't something I can just let be unsaid. I know it's easy to say racial issues are more pressing and dire (which they are), and thus comparing rhetoric is racist/ignorant on its own, but I'm sorry I'm not going to let people hand-wave me like that when they really be out here acting like my racist uncle who 'doesn't hate black people, but'.

Moving onwards, 3 & 7) Curious how you have a problem with 3 but agree with 7? Considering it's the same answer, I'm a little lost.

There are actual terms for people attracted to feminized males and females (or just feminized males- not my term, just the term I see used often, starts with a g, can’t remember it atm)

Looked it up, can't find anything, sorry. Anyways, I'll be honest, dictating sexuality to me when one of the big hangups radfems have is TRA's dictating sexuality to them is a bit ironic, I hope that isn't lost on you. There isn't VALUE to being straight or gay. There isn't anything WRONG with being straight or gay. The issue comes from placing me in the same category as men, or telling my husband actually he's gay despite the fact that he isn't.

5) And naturally you have sources to back up your feelings right? Or is it just feelings? Because I do.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25201798/

https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(18)30085-5/abstract (relates more to pronouns)

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26556015/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33529227/

In fact, the worst I can find is studies saying no one cares about trans people enough to get enough data and we need more studies:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31472062/ (badly formatted, sorry)

I should add a disclaimer that while I am very pro young-transition, we need to put a lot more money and effort into determining whether or not children have persistent GD as early as possible. That said, with regards to your point, children aren't old enough to give 'consent' to any medical treatment. None. We don't teach kids with depression to just learn to cope with being depressed all their lives, we don't tell kids with cancer they can't consent to treatment so tough luck. It is a medical illness, one we have cohesive proof we know how to alleviate. Puberty IS permanent, and does permanent psychological damage to kids with GD. Wishy-washy language about being affirming in less permanent ways is the reason poor kids in the UK can't get treatment anymore. Suicide rates go up when trans kids can't access treatment, we know this as a fact.

6)

And male bodies are different in ways that matter athletically before puberty

They aren't. Not even a little. The BEST I could find is pre-puberty boys have less body fat. BMI, Height, Weight, and Lean Mass are all almost identical until about 10-11 years old (the puberty age).

It’s not even just about a potential threat (and your existence has nothing at all to do with it), females should be allowed their own spaces for myriad reasons.

This is a nice thought, but again, I'm not going to put myself in danger for it. If you want to be the one to spearhead the march to put a gender-neutral bathroom in every building in the world, be my guest.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (46 children)

  1. Can you please explain how a racist saying something like “black people are violent and stupid” is comparable to saying “women are female, transwomen are not female”? Seriously, how are they remotely similar? It’s not rhetoric- it’s literally stating a biological truth. Calling it rhetoric isn’t going to make it less factual. It’s not a matter of skewed statistics about crime or intellect, it’s a matter of fact that everyone but qt/tra/some trans people understand. They aren’t comparable, and a long paragraph that talks about things we aren’t even discussing won’t make them comparable. You seem to be saying “don’t say the truth, even though it’s fact, because I don’t like to hear it”. That’s a worse argument than “it’s just the truth”

You’re not making a direct analogy. People who don’t follow trans ideology are doing so because of actual truth that applies to all humans, regardless of race or sexuality. Defend it all you want, you haven’t made a solid argument because there isn’t one to be made. You never explained why saying those things is transphobic or similar to racist rhetoric. You just claimed it was. There’s no assumptions or accusations being made. Transwomen are male, thats why they transition, transition doesn’t mean to become the opposite sex, it means you resemble the opposite sex, or have attempted to. There’s no “I don’t dislike trans people, but...” coming from me, so that doesn’t apply to me. The closest I’d get to that is, “I can understand that they struggle and suffer in some ways, but that doesn’t make them women and it doesn’t mean females are obligated to sacrifice our rights and spaces for them”. You can call it a different opinion, but biology and reproduction and the fact that we even exist today is reliant on my “opinion”. Women being female can be proven, qt claims about this topic cannot.

-2. gynandromorphophilia. That’s the word. Wasn’t hard to find at all once I looked it up.

It’s not ironic to say that there are in fact words that clearly and accurately explain sexuality. I didn’t say your husband is a gynandromorphophiliac, but he fits the meaning of the word so that’s what I’d use. Words have meanings. A man with a TW is not a heterosexual man. That’s not an insult, it’s not said to mock him or any TW. It’s just true that he fits that word. I didn’t say your husband was gay, but if you really think there’s nothing right or wrong about any sexuality, and he only dated TW or males before marrying you, he would in fact be gay, and that statement shouldn’t offend you. Even if TW were women they’d still be male women, and homosexual means same sex, not same sex unless they’re trans. Idk his dating history, but he married a TW so I know he’s not straight because I understand what words mean. I didn’t say, “-insert your husband’s name-, you have to be gay. You don’t have a choice.” He chose to enter a homosexual relationship, but with a feminized male. That, definitively, would indicate that he’s either bi or a gynandromorphophiliac (Idk if that’s the proper way to refer to a person).

-3. Didn’t agree with 3, maybe you got mixed up.

-4. As far as your question about 4, I have no problem with calling someone who I think is a woman a woman, I have a problem with being told I’m a bigot if I refuse to call an obvious male a woman or refer to him as she/her. I don’t care if someone calls me a terf, nor would I care if I were “misgendered”. You didn’t say it was a slur, so maybe better wording is that pronouns aren’t insults, they’re descriptors, if you visibly fit the description, or I know you factually do, I shouldn’t be told to lie or else I’m a bigot. You said it comes from transphobia, I could just as easily say that a male using those pronouns and calling himself a woman comes from a place of misogyny.

-5. There are several sources, many discussed and posted here, that back up the claim that blockers have adverse effects on children. I’m stunned you’d even pretend that there aren’t. It’s 4am where I live and I’m tired but can link a few of them later. Nobody said they had to “just cope” their whole lives, I said they shouldn’t be put on blockers that stunt their development in multiple areas, just so they can avoid puberty and if they choose to fully transition, have issues similar to Jazz Jennings that complicate even their transition because their body never developed as it should have. Treating cancer and treating a mental condition are vastly different things. I think you need to work on your analogies.

-6. Prepubescent bodies are different between sexes. Another easily proven fact that I can link to later today. Even if they weren’t, males, even trans ones, shouldn’t be taking away opportunities from females. Again, it’s not just safety (and fair play), it’s also that whole equality thing that apparently doesn’t matter if it’s the female who loses out because a male wants validation.

-7. As for the last paragraph: it’s not females jobs to advocate for or find solutions for males. Transwomen should have fought for their own, if they respected females they would have. I honestly dgaf about bathrooms, other than knowing it opens up potential danger, not necessarily from TW, but many women and girls do gaf, and the priority should be making sure the people the space was intended for and designed for are comfortable, not the people who it was intended to keep out (males). I can understand why a TW would choose to invade female spaces, that doesn’t make it right or fair to females.

*numbers don’t necessarily go with the original numbering, you jumped around a bit so I tried to put it all in the same area so I can follow the convo, sorry if it’s confusing

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

it’s not females jobs to advocate for or find solutions for males. Transwomen should have fought for their own

It's interesting how your side claims to include trans men in their feminism when they don't want to address men's issues, which affect trans men. There is an article on the Washington Post called Crossing the divide.

Trystan Cotton is a black trans man and a professor of gender studies at California State University Stanislaus. He said when he transitioned, sexism didn't end. Instead he traded in sexist experiences for other sexist experiences.

Life doesn’t get easier as an African American male. The way that police officers deal with me, the way that racism undermines my ability to feel safe in the world, affects my mobility, affects where I go. Other African American and Latino Americans grew up as boys and were taught to deal with that at an earlier age. I had to learn from my black and brown brothers about how to stay alive in my new body and retain some dignity while being demeaned by the cops.

I get pulled over a lot more now. I got pulled over more in the first two years after my transition than I did the entire 20 years I was driving before that. Before, when I’d been stopped, even for real violations like driving 100 miles an hour, I got off. In fact, when it happened in Atlanta the officer and I got into a great conversation about the Braves. Now the first two questions they ask are: Do I have any weapons in the car, and am I on parole or probation?

Cotten also claims a student he was mentoring began stalking him. His adviser and the dean — both women — laughed it off. When he presented as female, he was harassed at another university, and they reacted immediately, even sending a police escort with him to and from campus. A lot of people, especially GCs, believe women don't abuse men. On the old GC sub, someone wrote this post.

Get it through your heads. Women. Don't. Abuse. Men. PERIOD. Women don't have physical power over men. Women are not threatening to men. Women are not a danger to men. Women do not have power over men or advantages over men.

One person wrote this comment and it got downvoted and deleted:

This is bullshit. How fucking dare you. Women have abused men. No where near the numbers that MRAs claim, that is true. But my mother tried to kill my father and her children because she didn't want us anymore. I have friends who had abusive mothers, who were also abusive to their husbands. And no, our fathers were not abusive. Just because they couldn't match men in physical strength didn't mean that they couldn't cause hurt.

They still think women don't abuse men. There is a thread on Ovarit titled "Abuse is not "just female related" - it happens vice verse all the time, even if it's not that visual but it hurts even more." Sure, buddy, whatever you say.. They linked to a Reddit thread about there should be more series\films about abused men. Yet they got mad that we even acknowledge women can abuse men. Read the comments on Ovarit.

He only thinks it hurts more because men actually have the expectation of being treated well.

When Trystan Cotton was stalked by a female student, they laughed at him. When he was female and being harassed, they reacted immediately and sent a police escort. Why the difference in treatment? Is it because many people believe women don't abuse men, and GC promotes this idea all the time.

It does happen but not "all the time" and it doesn't hurt more. Why do they want to be THE victims so badly?

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

  1. What men’s issues affect transmen? And if they are specifically men’s issues, not female issues, but issues that a transman may encounter because she chooses to put herself in male specific settings, what does that have to do with females or feminism? We advocate for transmen to have female rights (as we do for any female), anything beyond that is a trans specific issue.

  2. She’s not dealing with male/men’s issues. She’s dealing with being black. Her presenting and presumably passing as a black male is why she’s experiencing those specific issues. This is not a trans, nor a feminist issue. It’s a race issue. An important one, to be clear, but that’s why we have both the BLM (and other advocacy groups for poc, and specifically black people) and the concept of being an ally. So feminists can and often do stand up for other marginalized groups (in this case, black people).

  3. Women can abuse men. Women can also abuse transmen. Women can also abuse children, each other etc. She should have gotten help just as anyone who is abused should be able to get help. The actions of whoever dismissed her are not the fault of gc people so I’m not sure what your point is.

  4. It’s a fact that males are disproportionately more likely to be abusive. That doesn’t mean that females can’t ever be abusive themselves. I’m really not sure what your point is.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

  1. One example is being seen as a threat when people wouldn't perceive you as a threat if you were a woman. Here is an article titled “Cultural sexism in the world is very real when you’ve lived on both sides of the coin”.

“I have to be very careful to not be staring at kids,” says Gardner. “I can look at a mom and her baby, but I can’t look for too long. I miss being seen as not a threat.” Ditto for kids on the playground and puppies, multiple guys said.

And to a man, everyone said they’d experienced a moment when they were walking at night behind a woman, and suddenly realized that she was walking faster or clutching her purse because she was scared.

“If I start to get too close, I can feel her fear, I can feel that she’s getting upset,” says Milan. “And it’s really just an indication of how dangerous this world is for women.”

As a trans man of color, Milan says he feels that the world perceives him as a menace, and his interactions with police officers have gotten much more fraught. “I’ve had people make assumptions that I was dangerous or I was a criminal. I’ve been followed around stores. I’ve seen white women who look physically scared, visibly shaken if there’s just the two of us in a elevator,” he says. “You can’t even ask a cop for directions as a black man.”

He says that before he transitioned he was catcalled on the street, but he didn’t feel like people assumed he was a criminal. “When I walk down the street no one knows that I’m a trans black man, people just see me as a black man,” he says. “So when we’re looking at all of this horrible police violence, it’s scary.”

Trans men may experience issues related to female biology. But feminism doesn't just protest issues relating to biology. Pregnancy is related to biology, so fighting against pregnancy discrimination would fall under that. Sexual harassment is not related to biology, but we still fight against it.

  1. Yes it is a black issue. My dad is white and when he got pulled over for not properly changing a lane (I was in the back seat) the police never asked him if he had any weapons or if he was on probation. He even told the officers he didn't think he did anything wrong, and they let him go with a warning. After the incident I told him if he was black he wouldn't be able to do that. I also know black women also experience police brutality, like Rekia Boyd, Sandra Bland and Breonna Taylor.

However, this man said as a woman he didn't get pulled over as often as police as he does now. For the 1st 2 weeks of his transition, he pulled over more times than he did in his 20 years of driving. Now the 1st thing they ask if he has weapons and if he's on parole and probation. Why does he get treated this way now and not before? His race didn't change. His gender presentation did. This is where intersectionality comes in. Being both black and male intersect.

The second example may or may not involve race. Yes it's possible they laughed at him because they think black men are supposed to be big and strong and scary. But, a lot of people also believe women don't abuse men. Would he have got the same treatment if he were white? Maybe or maybe not.

  1. That's excellent that you believe women can abuse men. However, many gender criticals do not. I don't know if the person who created the Duluth model is gender critical, but many don't challenge it, which is surprising because many GCs are lesbians and the Duluth model only talks about straight cis men abusing straight cis women. I have numerous examples on how they talk about male victims. This article says women tend to overestimate their use of violence while men tend to underestimate their use of violence.

This thing about male victims – Feminist Current

This article by the National Organization for Men Against Sexism (NOMAS) says women abusing men is extremely rare.

Are there instances in which men are physically dominated and assaulted by their female partners? This does occur, often when a man has become weakened by a factor such as illness, injury, or old age. Even in these circumstances abuse by a woman is unusual and when it does occur, it is most often motivated by self defense, fighting back and other protections. Even in these instances, the language “battered husbands” is not useful especially in light of the thousands and even millions of women known to have suffered or been murdered at the hands of a male abuser.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

  1. Pregnancy is a female issue. So it’s still about the transman being female, not trans.

  2. The woman in question is still getting pulled over because she appears to be a black male. It’s not her male appearance, it’s her race. It’s honestly insulting that you don’t understand the distinction. If she were white, she’d not be getting pulled over. The issue is her race, more so than her apparent sex. I’m not going to keep saying this so if you don’t get it after this, we’re done with this conversation.

  3. Regardless of race or sex, or anything that divides people, people seeking help from an abusive situation should be able to get help. Period. You keep acting like this is a gc thing, I’m gc, and I don’t think that. So you don’t get to just pick and choose which people you want to pretend speak for the whole of gc.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

  1. Yes only people AFAB can get pregnant. But feminism fights against all kinds of gender discrimination, not just something that is based o biology or female specific. We fight to end gender roles. We fight for equal pay. We fight for having access to all professions, regardless of gender. We fight sex-shaming.

  2. I understand the distinction. I'm saying it's race and gender combined. He says (not me, he) that in his 1st 2 weeks of passing as a black male, he got pulled over more times then he did in his 20 years of driving as a black female.

  3. The majority of GCs think that. I've linked to a few posts proving that and can link to more.

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

  1. What does any of this have to do with the transman you’re talking about? What’s your point, in listing some of the things that feminists fight for? It’s like you can’t admit that what I’m saying is right so you just start saying random shit

  2. I literally said that the issue is that she appears to be a black male. The issue, once again, is the BLACK part, if she were a white transman she would not get pulled over. What do you not understand? If you tell me, I can speak to you like a child so you get it. I understand that the cops pulling her over think she’s a male, but they aren’t pulling her over just because they think she’s a male. It is because she’s black. What does this have to do with female rights or feminism? Even if it was just because they think she’s male ans her race has no relevance, what would it have to do with feminism?

  3. Unless you can link some type of statistic or poll you cannot prove this. This is a false claim. I’m sure you can cherry pick other comments to bolster your claims. But if that’s what we’re doing we may as well say that the majority of transwomen want to rape, torture and murder any and everyone who disagrees with them, and that they hold a deep seated hatred for females in general. I can link a few posts proving that if you’d like. Since apparently comments and posts from some people in any given group is proof that the majority feels that way. While we’re at it, the majority of trans people advocate rape by deception and pressuring non trans people into sexual activities that they aren’t open to. I can link a few posts proving that, too. Is that how this works?

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Sloane said

And male bodies are different in ways that matter athletically before puberty

To which you say

They aren't. Not even a little. The BEST I could find is pre-puberty boys have less body fat. BMI, Height, Weight, and Lean Mass are all almost identical until about 10-11 years old (the puberty age).

LOL, you've clearly not had or raised children or been involved in monitoring their growth and seeing to their care.

If your claims were correct, why on earth do pediatricians and informed parents worldwide as well as national and international medical organizations like the CDC and WHO use different growth charts for male and female children from birth on? These charts state what the normal/typical ranges are for such factors as height, weight and head circumference of the two sexes are from birth onwards - as well as for how fast boys' & girls' bodies grow at different ages. And guess what, the ranges are different for each sex.

https://www.cdc.gov/growthcharts/clinical_charts.htm

https://www.verywellfamily.com/who-growth-charts-2633633

If your claims were correct, how do you account for the mini-puberty of infancy that occurs in the first six months of life, and the changes particularly in male physiology that follow?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6070773/

For those not aware of the puberty of infancy: starting around four weeks after birth, boy babies' testosterone climbs as high as it will be in the later puberty of adolescence and remains high for 4-5 months. The mini-puberty of infancy has been less studied in female humans, but from what is known girl babies have high estradiol during roughly the same time frame, although not usually as high as in the later puberty of adolescence - and the time frame for the mini puberty of infancy in females is much wider than in males.

Minipuberty describes the transient sex-specific activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis during the first 6 months of life in boys and during the first 2 years in girls. It leads to a rise of luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone, estradiol, and testosterone.

In boys, LH stimulates testosterone production, so the level of testosterone increases (RIA), peaking in the 2nd–3rd month of life. During this time, the testosterone values may reach those of fertile adult men.

This might just be the bias of scientists - who have always been more interested in studying males than females, and also have historically focused on the impact of testosterone above all other hormones including sex hormones - but at this point in time it is widely believed that the mini puberty of infancy has a more significant impact on male physical development than on female development.

Current thinking suggests that it is an essential imprinting period for different body functions. Firstly, minipuberty plays an important role in genital organ development; testosterone influences penile growth, the number of Sertoli cells, and spermatogenesis. Secondly, it seems to influence the infant’s body composition; testosterone likely has an imprinting effect on BMI and body weight of boys and growth velocity in the first 6 months of life.

Minipuberty is the second physiological transient activation of the HPG axis occurring in healthy infants at the age of 1–6 months. It plays an important role in the development of the genital organs and fertility in males and seems to influence the development of their body composition.

https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/508329

More on how "the rise in testosterone in the infant boy that is directly responsible for the increased skeletal growth" of male children compared to female children:

In this issue of Pediatrics, Kivirantiet al describe yet another effect of this neonatal androgen surge: increased skeletal growth. Although sex differences in linear growth in the first year of life have been described previously, this study is the first to link closely the testosterone surge of mini-puberty with the increased growth velocity in boys relative to girls. In this analysis, not only was the testosterone surge temporally linked to increased growth in both sexes, but the magnitude of the maximum growth velocity sex difference mirrors the magnitude of the sex difference in testosterone concentrations. Thus, these data strongly support the notion that it is the rise in testosterone in the infant boy that is directly responsible for the increased skeletal growth.

The magnitude of this effect on growth is not trivial. The 4.1-cm per year sex difference in growth velocity at 1 month of age reasonably explains the 1.9-cm mean difference in lengths between boys and girls at 12 months of age (and constitutes ∼15% of the height discrepancies between adult men and women).

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2016/06/07/peds.2016-1301.full.pdf

Here's an image of the chart used in US education since the 1980s that shows that from age 6-7 on in 1985, boys did better than girls in running sprints & the mile, and in curl-ups & pull-ups - with the advantages that males showed mostly widening over time. For example, to be in the 85th percentile at running the mile at ages 6, 7, 8 and 9, girls had to match or beat times of 11:20, 10:36, 10:02 and 9:30. By contrast, to be in the 85th percentile for their sex, boys of those very same ages had to match or beat times of 10:15, 9:22, 8:48 and 8:31.

https://echfoodie.com/presidential-physical-fitness-test-chart/

More background here:

https://clickamericana.com/topics/culture-and-lifestyle/school-education/presidential-physical-fitness-award-1968-1981

If your claims are correct, why is it that the US President's Physical Fitness Test/Challenge that American kids starting at age 10 have taken part in since the 1950s has always had different scoring criteria for males and female children?

https://images.agoramedia.com/shaq/worksheets/publicsite/shaq_fitness_test_scorecard.pdf

If your claims were correct, how do you account for the fact that since the early 1970s when girls were allowed to join/play Little League Baseball on an equal footing with boys, more than 11,040 male children have made it to the LL Baseball World Series, but only 19 female children have?

If your claims were correct, how do you explain this:

This was a cross-sectional study involving 312 children (10.8 ± 0.4 years). The physical fitness assessment employed sets of aerobic fitness, strength, flexibility, speed, agility, and balance. The boys presented higher values in all selected tests, except tests of balance and flexibility, in which girls scored better.

It has been observed that there is an apparent decrease in the interest of children in physical education classes and regular physical activity practice at school. This seems to be partly because of the lack of planning that takes into account the success of children in the execution of the exercises respecting the differences among students, including boys and girls. The knowledge of the magnitude of the differences between boys and girls in physical fitness (greater in the explosive strength of upper and lower limbs, and smaller in the abdominal and upper limbs muscular endurance and trunk extensor strength and flexibility, balance and speed), can help in the planning of activities that take into account the success of both boys and girls, and thus, increase levels of physical activity and physical fitness at school.

https://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Fulltext/2012/07000/Physical_Fitness_Differences_Between_Prepubescent.4.aspx

Also, as others have pointed out, comparing children circa 10 probably understates the differences in athletic abilities between the sexes because girls start puberty earlier than boys, and girls go through the major growth spurt that occurs in puberty at the start of this phase in development whereas boys have their major growth spurt at the end of puberty - or after puberty is over. So whilst circa 10-year-old boys & girls are chronologically the same age, developmentally girls of that age are usually considerably ahead than boys of the same age.

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

Just want to add this to my earlier comment in case someone brings it up.

In 2012, a lot of stories ran in the MSM saying new research had determined that there's no difference in male and female athletic performance in any sport before puberty. But this was wild generalization made on the basis of one paper having to do with one even in one sport - swimming. In the paper at issue, a researcher at Indiana University compared the best swim times of male and female competitors age 6-19 in the 50-yard freestyle over five years, and

found no difference in swim performance in children younger than 8. It also found little difference in 11- and 12-year-olds. The effects of puberty began showing in the older swimmers, as the boys began experiencing accelerated growth in height, weight and strength typical of age 13 and older.

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-05/iu-wsg052512.php

All the press who reported on this paper, and the researcher himself, portrayed his finding about one event in swimming to mean that boys & girls are equally matched in all athletics prior to puberty. And neither this researcher nor anyone in the MSM who misleadingly presented his findings seemed to realize something anyone who has grown up swimming knows: males' lower body fat and greater bone density is a disadvantage in swimming, whereas females' higher body fat and lower bone density are advantages. Coz of buoyancy. It's why even before puberty, males can't do water ballet.

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

LOL, you've clearly not had or raised children

I WONDER what gave it away.

Weird how the CDC charts you gave me place 7 year olds at almost identical in height and weight categories. I am aware boys are about 1cm taller on average around 12-24 months, but honestly... is this relevant? I doubt anyone is worried about the sanctity of 1 year old sports.

We CAN add bone density to the list. Though, I couldn't find any papers related and significant closer to 6-7 years of age, and that's when girl's T levels spike the highest relative to boy's T levels.

Mini-puberty is nebulous water to tread. Even one of the papers you linked said there are conflicting studies on the impact of testosterone in <36 month boys and growth. I requested the one they linked, we'll see if it's got any interesting data.

https://echfoodie.com/presidential-physical-fitness-test-chart/

link broke

If your claims are correct, why is it that the US President's Physical Fitness Test/Challenge that American kids starting at age 10 have taken part in since the 1950s has always had different scoring criteria for males and female children?

Puberty starts at 10.

If your claims were correct, how do you explain this:

This was a cross-sectional study involving 312 children (10.8 ± 0.4 years). The physical fitness assessment employed sets of aerobic fitness, strength, flexibility, speed, agility, and balance. The boys presented higher values in all selected tests, except tests of balance and flexibility, in which girls scored better.

It has been observed that there is an apparent decrease in the interest of children in physical education classes and regular physical activity practice at school. This seems to be partly because of the lack of planning that takes into account the success of children in the execution of the exercises respecting the differences among students, including boys and girls. The knowledge of the magnitude of the differences between boys and girls in physical fitness (greater in the explosive strength of upper and lower limbs, and smaller in the abdominal and upper limbs muscular endurance and trunk extensor strength and flexibility, balance and speed), can help in the planning of activities that take into account the success of both boys and girls, and thus, increase levels of physical activity and physical fitness at school.

Puberty starts at 10.

developmentally girls of that age are usually considerably ahead than boys of the same age.

I've read it has a lot to do with the heightened T levels, I want to do more reading into this as well later.

Thanks for the links, I'm going to sleep but I look forward to properly reading them when I wake up.

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Weird how the CDC charts you gave me place 7 year olds at almost identical in height and weight categories. I am aware boys are about 1cm taller on average around 12-24 months, but honestly... is this relevant? I doubt anyone is worried about the sanctity of 1 year old sports.

The links I provided show the various charts the CDC and WHO use at various ages of childhood, starting at birth. It's disingenuous to focus on the CDC charts for age 7 only.

If you looked into the matter more, you'd know why it is that age 7 girls & boys are the same height and weight: whilst males grow faster in early childhood, girls grow faster later on.

Also, if you knew more about this, you'd also know that sex differences that develop and exist in utero, infancy and early childhood can and do have profound impacts for what happens at those times in life as well as later on.

We CAN add bone density to the list.

Yes, bone density - and a lot of other factors, too. Such as the muscle mass of the left ventricle of the heart.

In childhood prior to puberty, the mean advantage males have over females in the amount of LV muscle mass is 6%, which is considered small compared to the male advantage in LV muscle mass that exists during and after puberty, which is 25-38%. But in sports the difference between winning, losing and not qualifying for competition at all often comes down to a tenths or hundredths of a second (or in elite sports, thousandths and millionths of a second). So in an athletics context, the fact that the average boy has a 6% advantage in LV muscle mass over the average girl can still be hugely significant.

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/01.HYP.26.6.979

And then there's lung capacity, which obviously has a huge impact on athletic ability:

Female lungs tend to be smaller and weigh less than those of males and, on average, may contain fewer respiratory bronchioles at birth. The number of alveoli per unit area and alveolar volume do not differ between boys and girls, but boys have larger lungs than girls. Thus, the total number of alveoli and alveolar surface area are larger for boys than for girls of a given age.

Whereas large airways tend to grow faster than parenchymal tissue in young females, the growth of large airways tends to lag behind that of the parenchyma in young males in a phenomenon known as dysanaptic growth, resulting in relatively narrower airways in young males than in young females. Maturation of the airways and lungs continues through childhood and into adolescence during which time, for the most part, males continue to have larger lungs than females. Further, the conducting airways of adult males are larger than those of adult females, even when lung or body sizes are equivalent.

Minor changes in lung structure and development can have a major impact on respiratory health in later life.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2391086/

At birth, females have smaller lungs than males with fewer respiratory bronchioles [1]. The sex-related differences in lung growth persist from childhood to adulthood. They are present also during the brief period of adolescence (from 11 to 13 years) when females are taller than males, because of the onset of the pubertal growth spurt.

Because boys have bigger lungs per unit of stature, they have a larger total number of alveoli and a larger alveolar surface area for a given age and stature.

The intrinsic elasticity of lung parenchyma is similar between sexes, whereas the recoil pressure differs because of the differences in lung size and in maximum distending forces.

The shape of the lung differs between males and females, being more pyramidal in the former and more prismatic in the latter.

The aforementioned sex-based differences in the structure and function of the respiratory system become critically important during dynamic exercise. The differences between women and men [some of which in the respiratory system are present from birth] impact the development of flow, the regulation of lung volume, the pressure swings and the consequent work of breathing.

And so on.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5980468/

BTW, some of the lung differences between male and female lungs and overall respiratory capacity give baby girls' survival advantages over boys in the case of certain neonatal illnesses. And these and all the other differences between the sexes allow females to do things males can't, such as conceive & gestate human offspring. I'm just focusing on the differences that exist in children prior to puberty that give boys a leg up - or two - in sports since those are specifically the issue here.

Sorry for the link that broke. If you're interested, a search for "president's physical fitness test boys and girls charts" will bring up plenty of results.

As to your question

is this relevant? I doubt anyone is worried about the sanctity of 1 year old sports.

I was responding to your earlier post in which you responded to Sloane's claim that "male bodies are different in ways that matter athletically before puberty" by asserting most emphatically and with an unwarranted air of authority:

They aren't. Not even a little. The BEST I could find is pre-puberty boys have less body fat. BMI, Height, Weight, and Lean Mass are all almost identical until about 10-11 years old (the puberty age).

It's true that one-year-olds aren't competing in sports. But babies and toddlers of both sexes do play and attend daycare/nursery and classes together. And the physical differences between male and female crawlers and toddlers of the same exact chronological age play a large role in what happens between the kids, and in which ones are most likely to pushed over (or down the stairs) and end up hurt.

Moreover, a lot of kids start playing sports pretty early. LL starts official Tee ball leagues at four. And whilst theoretically Tee ball has been open to both sexes since the 1970s, after mixed-sex Tee ball was introduced, LL eventually had to reinstate an an all-male category of Tee ball starting at age four because of the performance differences in the two sexes even at such an early age.

Mini-puberty is nebulous water to tread. Even one of the papers you linked said there are conflicting studies on the impact of testosterone in <36 month boys and growth.

I don't understand what you mean by "nebulous water to tread."

Yes, there are conflicting studies, as there are in many areas. And the mini puberty of infancy is insufficiently researched. But the fact is, starting in utero and throughout the rest of human development prior to puberty, there are TONS of differences between males and females that matter in sports - when initially you claimed that there aren't any.

Puberty starts at 10.

This is not true, although puberty can and often does start at 10 or before.

Puberty starts at 10.

No many how many times you repeat it, such a blanket statement doesn't become any truer than when you said it the first time.

The age at which puberty starts varies considerably between the two sexes, amongst different races, ethnicities and countries of residence. It also varies considerably amongst individuals within sex and race/ethnic and nationality categories. Kids in the same family, even those of the same sex within the same family, often begin puberty at markedly different ages.

USA health officials say puberty

usually happens between ages 10 and 14 for girls and ages 12 and 16 for boys.

https://medlineplus.gov/puberty.html

The UK's NHS says puberty says

The average age for girls to begin puberty is 11, while for boys the average age is 12.

But it's different for everyone, so don't worry if your child reaches puberty before or after their friends.

It's completely normal for puberty to begin at any point from the ages of 8 to 14. The process can take up to 4 years.

https://www.nhs.uk/live-well/sexual-health/stages-of-puberty-what-happens-to-boys-and girls/#:~:text=Puberty%20is%20when%20a%20child's,the%2

What some other sources say:

https://kidshealth.org/en/kids/boys-puberty.html

https://www.healthline.com/health/parenting/stages-of-puberty#tanner-stage-1

https://www.medicinenet.com/puberty/article.htm

There's no shame in not knowing much about infant and child development. But people who know little about the topic really should think twice before making sweeping pronouncements about it as you have done. Especially as you are advocating giving experimental medical treatments to children of both sexes with GD starting at puberty with the attempt to outfox biology and prevent puberty.

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Just wanted to add:

The "puberty blockers" and cross-sex hormones you advocate administering at an early age to male and female children alike have not been proven to relieve psychological distress in the recipients. Look at Jazz Jennings - on blockers starting age 10/11, exogenous estrogen since age 12, constantly praised and fawned over for being trans, and made lots of money from it too. Still, Jazz was too mentally unwell in 9/10th grade to continue with regular HS so switched to online studies, and then at age 18/19 after the "miracle cure" of genital surgeries, Jazz still had to postpone going off to college coz of poor mental health.

The true story of Jazz is significant coz Jazz is literally the USA's "poster child" not just for childhood transition, but for using "the Dutch protocol," meaning early use of drugs to block puberty. Recently, one of the Dutch clinicians who came up this protocol, Thomas Steensma, said that while it might have been suitable for the small number of Dutch children treated with it in Amsterdam in the early 2000s (2000-2008, to be precise)

“We don’t know whether studies we have done in the past can still be applied to this time. Many more children are registering, and also a different type, ”says Steensma. “Suddenly there are many more girls applying who feel like a boy. While the ratio was the same in 2013, now three times as many children who were born as girls register, compared to children who were born as boys.

https://www.voorzij.nl/more-research-is-urgently-needed-into-transgender-care-for-young-people-where-does-the-large-increase-of-children-come-fro

BTW, even in their original research that caused "the Dutch protocol" to be taken up in other countries, the Dutch researchers did not find that puberty blockers were completely successful at alleviating distress. Rather, they found that between T0 (not being on blockers) and T1 (after being on blockers for varying amounts of time, the actual time frames of which are not stated in the abstracts currently available to me online)

Behavioral and emotional problems and depressive symptoms decreased, while general functioning improved significantly during puberty suppression. Feelings of anxiety and anger did not change between T0 and T1. While changes over time were equal for both sexes, compared with natal males, natal females were older when they started puberty suppression and showed more problem behavior at both T0 and T1. Gender dysphoria and body satisfaction did not change between T0 and T1.

So feelings of anxiety, anger, gender dysphoria and body satisfaction - none of them improved on blockers.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20646177/

In female children put on blockers by the Tavistock GIDS in the UK, not only was no benefit found - but girls on blockers became more likely to self-harm and have thoughts of suicide than beforehand.

The "cure" you advocate for young children with GD will leave most of them sterile, sexually dysfunctional, without libido or ability to orgasm, with compromised cognitive faculties, stunted psychology and perhaps diminished IQ. It's a treatment that totally contradicts the principles of "first do no harm" and evidence-based care.

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Behavioral and emotional problems and depressive symptoms decreased, while general functioning improved significantly during puberty suppression. Feelings of anxiety and anger did not change between T0 and T1. While changes over time were equal for both sexes, compared with natal males, natal females were older when they started puberty suppression and showed more problem behavior at both T0 and T1. Gender dysphoria and body satisfaction did not change between T0 and T1.

So feelings of anxiety, anger, gender dysphoria and body satisfaction - none of them improved on blockers.

Behavioral and emotional problems and depressive symptoms decreased, while general functioning improved significantly during puberty suppression

Behavioral and emotional problems and depressive symptoms decreased

while general functioning improved significantly during puberty suppression

You didn't even read the thing you quoted. I just can't.

The study measures a lot of different variables in mental health. GD and body satisfaction remained the same (which is understandable, puberty blockers literally just block puberty, your body is doing the opposite of changing.) while "Behavioral and emotional problems and depressive symptoms" were reduced. Literally a net positive.

The "cure" you advocate for young children with GD will leave most of them sterile, sexually dysfunctional, without libido or ability to orgasm, with compromised cognitive faculties, stunted psychology and perhaps diminished IQ. It's a treatment that totally contradicts the principles of "first do no harm" and evidence-based care.

cite your sources. And maybe actually read them this time.

[–]adungitit 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

A racist is still a racist, and his opinions are still opinions.

Racism by its very nature relies on the idea that certain races are inferior to others. The notion that female people are female and that male people are male does not put one above the other, much like how recognising that black people aren't white doesn't suddenly legitimise racist ideas of white supremacy (speaking of which, "I don't see colour and all the people recognising different races are the real racists" is also a common racist talking point). What is closer to racism is the notion that women are defined as (insert whatever misogynistic stereotype that attempts to tie their physiology with gender stereotypes) as opposed to the objective physical reality of their existence.

Just don't go shouting from the rooftops about a sexuality you think my husband and other people have that they don't have.

If being straight can mean anything anyone wants now, including men fucking other men who roleplay as women, or wear dresses, or artificially induce a hormonal disorder in their bodies, or just write "she" pronouns in their Twitter bio, then why wouldn't another person's idea that this isn't straight be equally valid? Why is it that only trans people get to co-opt sexualities and make demands on what these sexualities are now going to be? Why is only one side allowed to shout from rooftops if everything is so subjective and equally valid and don't you try to gatekeep or else it's literal violence?

misgendering will always be seen as an action performed to denigrate trans people.

And lying about someone's gender because they feel like they have a "female brain" or "like wearing panties" is always going to be a misogynistic insult to women. Why is misogyny and dehumanisation of women for being born female consistently portrayed as a non-issue, while everyone needs to shed tears over trans people not getting everyone else to literally lie to make it easier for them to ignore reality? Like, sorry, but "people thinking I'm subhuman for being female" just seems a helluva lot more unfair than "People won't lie that my religious beliefs are reality to make me feel good".

Dysphoria is a bitch

Gotta love progressives and liberals using misogynistic slurs :)

You know what else sucks? Misogyny.

early transition relieves it much better than late transition.

This is irrelevant. Children cannot consent to irreversible and damaging bodily procedures. The fact that an extremely small number of kids might benefit from it does not justify allowing children to do this.

What do you think happens when emotionally unstable children are told they can't have access to healthcare they know exist?

Right, let's just make everything legal for children because they're going to get it anyways!

alongside conversion therapy pushing

Being trans is a severe mental disorder characterised by intense anxiety over a perfectly healthy body, seeking amputations and a lifetime of medicine and an artifically induced hormonal imbalance in order to feed an idea that is at odds with reality and pretend that you're something you're not. Trying to heal a mental disorder that is by its very nature damaging to your life and causes extreme negative reactions over perfectly normal and healthy things that cannot be changed is not "conversion therapy". It is impossible to change one's sex. It cannot be done. Not because GC are meanies, but because that's simply the nature of our biology. Plastic surgeries and amputations still don't cure this anxiety because trans people continue to insist that everyone else needs to lie about reality to uphold their fragile worldview. If transition magically fixed everything, trans people would not keep getting mental breakdowns over people not using the pronouns they want them to use, and a lot of the current selfID insanity probably wouldn't be a thing.

I'm pretty militant about pre-transition use of women's spaces

Riiight. Because post-transition male people are just sooo safe and totally not misogynistic. I mean, they say so. Alongside MRAs and liberal men and gay men and bullied men and...

I'm not putting myself at risk because of an implied threat from my existing

Right, better to put women at risk instead. After all, what are female spaces for if not to house vulnerable men and keep them safe? We wouldn't want men to be at risk of violence, now would we? :,(

Sports is a harder bear to tackle

Should male people compete in sports whose entire existence is owed to the fact that female people cannot compete against male people? Hmm, tough choice 🤔

but this is why we need pre-puberty transition :)

Too bad that letting children to irreparable damage to their bodies is seen as immoral in our society :)

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Sorry, I'm expecting the dogpile, I've done this game before, and since I'm not perfect with english I usually take way too long with responses to respond to everyone. That said, I appreciate that you have a very strong opinion on how gender dysphoria SHOULDN'T be treated. Do you have medical sources backing this up? Are you a doctor? A psychiatrist? No?

Let me be clear. If I did not self-med when I did I would have killed myself. That was the plan. I know multiple people who were in the same boat when they were younger. Pretending dysphoria is an issue we can just therapist away is how it happens. If someone comes up with a miracle pill that cures the dysphoria without having to transition in a society that hates us, amazing, i'll take two, but that's not going to happen, so unless you have any bright ideas you and everyone else can stop trying to criminalize the only treatment we have concrete evidence of working in ANY capacity.

[–]MarkTwainiac 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

If someone comes up with a miracle pill that cures the dysphoria without having to transition

There it is in a nutshell: unless the world comes up with a miracle pill, then every person who feels distress over their sex - even young children - should be given all the hormone treatments & cosmetic surgeries they desire on demand, no questions asked; what's more, all these treatments & cosmetic surgeries along with the myriad health problems they cause now or down the line should be paid for by government health services or plans or private or government insurance, whichever is applicable.

People struggle with all sorts of issues over the course of life - after all, none of us gets out alive. But I've never heard anyone dealing with cancer, cystic fibrosis, arthritis, kidney disease, MS, psoriasis, IBS, primary immune deficiency, depression, neuropathy and/or myriad other serious conditions say that if they aren't given a "miracle pill" pronto, then they must be granted the right to obtain - and for free - whatever drugs, surgeries and cosmetic procedures they think best, even when there is no incontrovertible evidence that these will help alleviate their distress over the long term. Even when there is accumulating evidence that in a large number of cases, especially those involving female people, this approach does considerably more harm than good.

Yes, people with various illnesses often dream of a "miracle pill," but they/we don't demand it. Coz the belief in a miracle pill is indicative of magical thinking, and magical thinking itself is inherently childlike and unrealistic.

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Hey bud, you wanna finish that quote?

If someone comes up with a miracle pill that cures the dysphoria without having to transition

but that's not going to happen

But sure.

no incontrovertible evidence that these will help alleviate their distress over the long term

I mean, this is just untrue. I can link you the cornell aggregate study if you want, though I'm sure you've seen it before. I can click related links on pubmed til the cows come home if you want. Overwhelmingly data suggests transitions alleviates mental stress over dysphoria.

Fuck it, I'll do it anyways

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5580378/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19473181/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24344788/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25536896/

https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/%20what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people%20/ And here is the Cornell review if you've somehow never been given it.

I'm not demanding a miracle pill. I am demanding access to healthcare.

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

People of all "gender identities" have the same access to healthcare in the West.

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

I appreciate that you have a very strong opinion on how gender dysphoria SHOULDN'T be treated

Any treatment that lets minors perform damaging cosmetic surgeries should be unacceptable. You can talk about how unfair this is, but protection of minors, much like female rights, exists for reasons other than just making trans people feel boo-hoo.

If I did not self-med when I did I would have killed myself

There are people who would've killed themselves had they not found God. There are men who would've killed themselves had they not found one of their numerous misogynistic role models. Other people's mental issues do not oblige me to pretend that harmful misogynistic ideologies are true and factual just so they would feel better.

you and everyone else can stop trying to criminalize the only treatment we have concrete evidence of working in ANY capacity.

I never said I would criminalise it. I did say that it doesn't work as well as it is portrayed to work, since it still relies on forcing the rest of society to say things that are contrary to reality for the trans person to be able to function.

[–]comradeconradical 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (50 children)

Sports is a harder bear to tackle, but this is why we need pre-puberty transition :)

disgusting, smiley face doesn't soften the blow of child abuse

ETA: nor does the smiley it make it okay to reduce females in women's sports

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (49 children)

Ethically speaking, child abuse is refusing children medical treatment of which we have concrete evidence of efficacy. But sure.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (46 children)

If a twelve year old girl wants breast implants and received them, is it medically ethical? How about giant bum implants? How about a mastectomy at 14? People deemed too incapable of long-term planning that they cannot get tattoos are ok to get elective cosmetic surgery because..? They are extremely sad without it? I was sad about not getting cosmetic procedures as a teen too. Doesn’t mean it would have been ethical for anyone to give me them.

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (45 children)

If you think the standard of care for trans kids includes surgery you clearly have no idea what you're talking about and I'm not going to bother responding, or you do and you're asking in bad faith, again, I won't respond.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (43 children)

So you are totally unable to draw a comparison with cosmetic procedures being harmful and drugs that cause osteoporosis in preparation for cosmetic surgery being harmful and neither being appropriate for children?

You’re quick to refuse to debate people considering you’re coming here to debate. You can’t just ignore everyone who challenges you and still call it debating. Be good faith or go be with the other tra who only want agreement.

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (42 children)

I'm not going to debate someone debating something wholly irrelevant. You can try and debate me in any number of topics that don't matter. If I start trying to ask why radfems want to murder trans babies and their parents are you going to give me any shred of dignity and respond?

Cosmetic procedures aren't harmful, they just aren't fit for minors. You're the one saying they are harmful in the first place.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (40 children)

So no you definitely can’t draw the obvious comparison, or debate anyone who challenges you. Thanks for confirming.

Osteoporosis causing meds to prepare for future surgery aren’t quite irrelevant to cosmetic procedures being harmful. Puberty blockers provide a cosmetic changes by not allowing the body to develop. It’s not like they’re using them as an antidepressant.

Reddit is full of subs where you won’t be disagreed with and need to announce your plan to ignore every user who responds to you.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (39 children)

“Murder trans babies”

Wow lmao what a fucking reach

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (38 children)

GC Murder trans babies but I’m being too ridiculous to debate lmao.

Dangerous drugs used for cosmetic effects in preparation for future cosmetic surgery being compared to cosmetic surgery alone is incomprehensible, and I’m the idiot here.

How does anyone take these arguments so seriously that they pretend sex doesn’t exist? My nieces gave better during their tantrums.

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

If I start trying to ask why radfems want to murder trans babies

That's literally the level of argumentation that QT brings to the table, though? And GC still respond, and QT usually either cannot respond, or they start complaining because they didn't parrot "transwomen are women" fast enough.

[–]worried19 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It does include surgery in the USA.

The mean (SD) age at chest surgery in this cohort was 17.5 (2.4) years (range, 13-24 years), with 33 (49%) being younger than 18 years. Of the 33 postsurgical participants younger than 18 years at surgery, 16 (48%) were 15 years or younger

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VG30CYPOQOrjEaYP2ocTYH272uqZo3TG/view

Of the 11 surgeons who had performed vaginoplasty on a transgender female minor, 10 were in private practice. Reported ages of minors undergoing surgery ranged from 15 to “a day before 18” years

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1861PShuvWj6jt2PrRx7gueqv5dvvz-Fn/view

A gender therapist with the Kaiser Permanente healthcare organization in Oakland, California admits: “In terms of masculinizing top surgery, I think 12 is the youngest who’s had surgery through our program . . . .”

https://blobby.wsimg.com/go/d795ab62-2d39-4341-afbb-ed897c5ad0a7/UPDATED%20Treatments%20Performed%20on%20Minors%20-%20Hand%20.pdf

This is not a figment of people's imaginations. It is actually happening. There are studies and multiple verified reports of this happening on a regular basis to minors.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Apparently the side effects being lower bone density, stunted growth, increased risk of osteoporosis, less development of genital tissue, the fact that even the children who stop taking them often don’t in fact resume puberty, the fact that in a study almost all participants reported no improvement in their psychological well-being, sterilization, and I believe delayed mental development, all of which a child is not mature enough to give any real consent to enduring is not child abuse, because at least the kiddies got their validation vitamins.

Okay then.

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

the majority of children with dysphoria desist as they age, so no, I don't think this is the only or even the best option.

Sadly for many of these kids, they will have been subjected to unethical experimental procedures that result in stunted development, sterilization and for many young females even mutilation of healthy breast tissue.

also, again, even males who went on puberty blockers shouldn't participate in female sports.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

  1. In my honest opinion, it isn't.
  2. I don't believe it's transphobic, though it may be upsetting to some. It's a matter of reality (biology)
  3. I don't know that it really is "transphobic". Functionally, natal sex coupled with corresponding natal sex is homosexual, with the opposite sex it's heterosexual. Homophobia may be the culprit.
  4. Where I grew up in rural Minnesota, it wasn't at all odd to use "them" or "their" ("dem" "der") to refer to a singular person. I don't know much about Scandinavian or Germanic language, but a lot of the vernacular was borrowed from that. It was a way to speak somewhat lazily I suppose. I don't live there anymore, but I still speak that way somewhat, and the thinking is that you can't assume the "gender" of the person--not because you want to be progressive, but because you're honest and being pragmatic. Maybe this doesn't make sense, but I feel like where I grew up gender divisions weren't quite as strict as they may be elsewhere.
  5. I don't think it's transphobic, per se, but a blanket sweeping legislation on it might hurt the couple of kids who could probably use it. It's a sacrifice to make, I suppose, but it's probably better to help keep more kids off them who don't really need them than to open it up for everyone, which would really only benefit a small fraction of children.
  6. I don't think this is considered transphobic at all. Females should have their own spaces separate from men. The argument that QT puts forth is that it somehow invalidates the womanhood of transwomen, and that's it. It's about hurt feelings. If transwomen need a space away from other males, then that's a different issue and shouldn't require coopting women's spaces.
  7. Once again, it isn't really transphobic, it's about hurt feelings. Peoples' sexuality regarding trans people hasn't really been scrutinized before, but the TWAW and TMAM rhetoric has brought it out into the sunlight for all to see. You can't (or shouldn't) police peoples' sexualities, it's dumb. All of this boils down to words, really, and some homophobia. The "super" phenomenon was a backlash against trans people and their allies decreeing "transphobia" when faced with rejection in love and sex. The "super" phenomenon was less transphobic and more an artistic statement made by the people, a type of performance art that's ongoing.
  8. I believe that transphobia stems from homophobia, which stems from misogyny. Actual transphobia would be being denied a promotion or job because of one's history, or denied access to medical care or housing or public services because they're trans. I suspect actual transphobia, or the more common manifestations of it, are subtle and difficult to prove. That's all from my perspective though, perhaps I'm totally wrong or out of line. Hopefully this was somewhat helpful!

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think I pretty much agree with you lol thank you for your response

Eta- i do think the “super” trend is less art and more a direct response to the current tra/qt narrative of “be open to including trans people in your sexuality or you’re a bigot/ you have a genital preference/fetish” thing we are dealing with. I do think it started as a joke mirroring what the most extreme qt are doing and saying, but I also think quite a few people are serious now

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I live and breathe art, and to me it is something that encapsulates a statement, a problem, a moment and draws attention via intent. It's surreal that the "Super+" phenomenon could blur the lines of reality like that, but that's something that good art can do. I agree that it is a manifestation of the unrest and upset that is felt by people who feel pressured into accepting trans people into their sexuality. It's odd to watch as it continues, because it was clearly a joke for some, a vehicle for non sequiturs for others, and a genuine means of sharing a message for those who wished to do so. (I suppose this could turn into its very own artsy argument!)

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That’s beautifully put! I’m an artist too so I get what you’re saying. It’s certainly an interesting movement and while I don’t think it’ll last very long, it’s been fascinating to see where it’s being taken.

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

Thank you for the stimulating questions! It was interesting to think about :)

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's a sacrifice to make, I suppose, but it's probably better to help keep more kids off them who don't really need them than to open it up for everyone, which would really only benefit a small fraction of children.

Thanks for saying this! It’s such an good point and I wish I heard trans people say it more often.

Most gender dysphoric children will desist during puberty. It’s wrong to harm those kids just because a few of them won’t desist. Plus, the children who persist will still be able to transition fine a few years later. I get so upset about this.

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

Watching videos of desisters and detransitioning kids and young adults just breaks my heart, honestly. I hate to see any child suffer and especially empathize with those struggling with unremitting gender dysphoria that will continue into adulthood, but treatment can and should be postponed if possible. If it will persist, it will persist. Most can transition in their late teens to mid twenties without complications and integrate into society if that's their destiny.

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

What’s your basis for saying most can integrate. I was still salvageable when I first told someone who I really was as a younger teen. By 18 my body was already hopeless to pass and I’m certainly not alone in that.

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

1) it's not.

2) a political opinion can be transphobic, or racist or homophobic. If you push to take away a gay couples right for adoption, that's homophobic and political. It really depends on the reasoning behind it.

3) The terms of a relationship are defined by the people in it. If the dude I'm seeing sees me as a woman then it's a straight relationship. If you wanna call it gay I'd say it's inaccurate, but whatever floats your boat.

4) misgendering is often used to attack trans people on a deeply personal level. But I like comparisons. If you cite the bell curve because of your worldview and science your're probably a racist. If you misgender trans folk intentionally because of your worldview you're probably a transphobe. 5) Gotta get em young you know. Can't build a "transsexual empire" if you don't start early. Edgy jokes aside. GD is an actual thing and early treatment gives better results overall. Not for everything [trans men beeing shorter and trans women may have issues with SRS later] sure. Secondly if we continue assuming that GD exists, then we should enable those who suffer from it to have access to the most effective treatment possible. If you don't think it exists, then you may want to provide another reason for why trans folk exist.

6) spaces and sports are different and should be evaluated differently. I'm not knowledgeable on sports so I won't comment. Spaces depend on the space. Bathrooms don't get safer for women if trans folk have to use the bathroom according to their sex, once you actually think about it and grant the premise that predators will dress as trans women to gain access to these spaces. Let me explain. If trans women had to use men's bathrooms it would follow that trans men should use women's bathrooms. Trans men don't pose a threat to women, because they are women, but a certain percentage passes as cis at a glance. Now you have male presenting people in women's bathrooms. So a cis predator wouldn't even have to try and present female to gain access to women's spaces. If you wanna argue that it's especially the trans women who pose a threat, then that would be transphobic. If you argue for 3rd spaces you probably aren't.

On the note of using these spaces pre transition. Don't. But if your medical system requires social transition before access to treatment that's a different story.

Prisons and similar are a different issue, but even there strict sex segregation isn't the solution if you have the safety of all vulnerable groups both during and after the sentence in mind. The latter is especially important if we want to use prsion as a chance to reform and not just as penalty.

7) as I've said before superstraight is actually quite welcome. If you give me a heads up that you don't wanna date me great. I don't get the comparison to hair color, height or race or whatever traits, but I can't intuit sexuality in general so that's most likely a me problem.

What I have an issue with is the current state of the movement. It's not the alledgedly wholesome movement it started out as. At least not anymore. There is a ton of transphobia running around. I also don't get the need to organize a movement. If you wanna write superstraight in your dating profile great. If you go full pride Mode like the oppressed majority you are and parade it on Twitter you're probably transphobic.

The discussion about "super" straight as opposed to something like cisgay or cisbi is also interesting, but useless. The only person it tells us anything about is the dude on tiktok who came up with it.

8) I think you found the most of the common points.

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

Prisons and similar are a different issue, but even there strict sex segregation isn't the solution if you have the safety of all vulnerable groups both during and after the sentence in mind.

What's your view on hospital and nursing or care home placement, and on intimate care in such settings or at home?

Should women who are bedridden, ill, long-term disabled and/or elderly have to share hospital rooms, wards & toilet & bathing facilities with members of the opposite sex based on the other persons' gender identity?

If you have a grandmother or great-grandmother who resides in a long-term HCF, would you label her transphobic and bigoted if she felt uncomfortable having to share a room and toilet/bathing facilities with someone of the opposite sex who enjoyed all the perks & privileges of being a male for 60-70 years (like Jenner, Pritzker, Eddie Izzard) but late in life started claiming to be a woman? What if she had known -or known of - this person for decades?

Is it transphobic for disabled, elderly and/or dying girls & women who need help with intimate care like bathing and toileting to want such care to be provided only by other females, not by males who wish they were female? Is it transphobic for a girl or woman in such circumstances to feel deeply uncomfortable with the idea of getting such care from someone who is male but claims to "identify as" a woman?

Is it transphobic of disabled and elderly people who depend on home carers and assistants to stipulate that such persons be one sex or the other? Should those of us who are dependent on in-home assistance not have a say about the sex of the people who come into our homes to provide us with nursing, intimate and other kinds of care? Is it morally wrong for vulnerable people who need home care to want to have a say over the sex of who we let into the one place that's supposed to be our very own "safe space"?

Is it transphobic for girls & women to only want intimate medical care like pelvic exams, Pap smears, mammograms & forensic exams done after rape or assault by a male to be done only by someone who is female?

Is it transphobic for men getting prostate exams to want them done by someone else with a prostate, rather than by a female person who identifies as a man? Are elderly men who feel comfortable getting intimate care only from someone of a certain sex transphobic?

Is it transphobic for an adolescent male with a groin injury requiring surgery to be very uncomfortable at the idea of having his wound checked and tended to - and his post-op intimate washing done - by someone of the opposite sex, regardless of how they identify? Is it transphobic and immoral of him to insist that those providing such care be male like he is? Is his mother transphobic if she respects his wishes? Or should she tell him he's a bigot for not wanting to get such care from a female who "identifies as" a man?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

-2. Not even trying to be snarky but I don’t get how my second question is at all related to being gay or opinions on gay people. I’m a bit unsure where this answer came from and would need you to explain before I can address it. As for the part about political views- me saying transwomen aren’t women is not based on politics, it’s based on biology. Tras made this statement political. Not the rest of us.

-3. If the terms of a relationship are determined by the people in it, then we may as well just throw away any words used to describe sexuality. Two males that aren’t trans could be a heterosexual relationship if they say it is? A woman and a man (neither are trans) could be a lesbian relationship if they say it is? A monogamous couple could call themselves polygamists? That’s faulty logic imo

-4. So if I say, “I only use sex based pronouns due to my beliefs, it is not intended to upset you” before I properly address a person’s sex it’s okay?

This isn’t comparable to racism. It’s fact that TW are males and TM are female. Seriously this comparison is so off. If we’re doing these types of comparisons, do we get to call trans people totalitarian dictators, since you want to force language on others? Gender is societal, so if society recognizes that you’re a male and you demand the opposite pronouns, aren’t you misgendering yourself?

-5. It’s not about whether or not gd exists, it’s about the side effects that blockers have on children’s body. You made an edgy joke but you seem to believe it so I’m not so sure your joking at all.

-6. My argument is that females should have their own spaces. That sex based spaces should remain so. From bathrooms to changing rooms to prisons and everything in between. It is wrong to force females to share those spaces with males. Alternate solutions should be found. Period. Female rights ans spaces shouldn’t be compromised for males. Ever. Transwomen aren’t the only males that could be in danger in those spaces. So find a way to fix it for all males and treat TW with equality, not special treatment.

-7. It’s not just super straight. Lesbians, bisexuals and gay men have all jumped on the super train. Are you saying they aren’t oppressed?

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

If you push to take away a gay couples right for adoption, that's homophobic and political.

So what would you call people pushing to take away women's (a vulnerable group) rights to spaces free of men and male predation?

If you misgender trans folk intentionally because of your worldview you're probably a transphobe.

And if you use preferred pronouns because of your worldview and demand to take away spaces where women don't have to deal with men, you're probably a misogynist. Congrats!

early treatment gives better results overall

The problem is that with all the gender troubles and traumas that children are exposed to, especially at the start of puberty, and with the extremely toxic environment regarding the trans condition in general (society still thinking women are from Venus and men from Mars, and children having toonishly exaggerated interpretations of this [with even adult trans people pinpointing the dolls they played with or the dresses they did/didn't want to wear as evidence of being male or female], the widespread popularity of super unique trans identities, the idea that challenging anyone on this matter is literal violence, gender dysphoria no longer even being required to be trans, the reality of sexist gendering truly starting to rear its ugly head with all the associated trauma at that age), children are absolutely not qualified to decide on such medical procedures for the same reason why they're not qualified to decide on other things as well. Like, if weed helped a few children get over some issues they were having, I still wouldn't wouldn't legalise it for all minors on the basis of them saying they need it, and it doesn't matter how well the small number of them felt from that.

predators will dress as trans women to gain access to these spaces

Actually, I think regular men crossdressing just to get into toilets isn't as much of a concern as selfID allowing literally any average man to get into female spaces unchallenged. Shelters and prisons are an entirely different issue though, and the men there are known to go to any extreme and take advantage of any loophole in order to prey on women.

a cis predator wouldn't even have to try and present female to gain access to women's spaces.

Seems like something that would be fixed with the ID that stated a person's actual sex, so if any woman felt unsafe, she could get security to check. Female trans people that would make you absolutely think they're men would probably be so rare they couldn't affect what's considered normal in bathrooms. But really I don't think anyone cares where female trans people do their business, they can go gender-validate themselves in the urinals for all I care.

If you wanna argue that it's especially the trans women who pose a threat, then that would be transphobic.

Right. Women having spaces free from men and their oppression is transphobic.

If you argue for 3rd spaces you probably aren't.

Sounds like a point that the people trying to violate women's spaces should start with, not women. But people just love to insist that women should fight other people's battles first if they want their rights to be respected second. Also you'll find that the majority of GC has no issue whatsoever with 3rd spaces for trans people.

if your medical system requires social transition before access to treatment that's a different story.

I feel like parts of the trans movement are starting to be against this, but for entirely wrong reasons (mainly just to get to the drugs quicker).

Now you have male presenting people in women's bathrooms.

This is simply going to happen as more and more women are (hopefully) going to be gender nonconforming.

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

Secondly if we continue assuming that GD exists, then we should enable those who suffer from it to have access to the most effective treatment possible. If you don't think it exists, then you may want to provide another reason for why trans folk exist.

But how is it that the "best" treatment possible for it 1) doesn' t cure the issue and doesn' t even attempt to deconstruct it, 2) is considered insane for any other kind of body dysphoria?

[–]a_green_squidtransmed i guess? 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

If you don't think it exists, then you may want to provide another reason for why trans folk exist.

Trust me, I want it to not exist too, you guys.

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Would be nice xS

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

1. Why is it transphobic to not want to sleep with/date a trans person (pre or post op)?

It's not. You don't have to sleep with anybody for any reason whatsoever.

2. Why is saying transwomen are men/not women or transmen are women/not men transphobic, as opposed to a difference of opinion/political view?

An opinion can still be transphobic.

3. Why is it transphobic (as opposed to technically accurate) to describe relationships with trans people in a definitively accurate way (meaning saying a TW with a woman is a heterosexual relationship, or a TM with a woman is a homosexual relationship, for example)?

I am straight. I am attracted to people who present as men. Laverne Cox is a trans woman, and passes. As a straight woman, she is too feminine for me. But I would be attracted to a passing trans man. I'm still straight.

4. Why is refusal to use pronouns, particularly if the reason is just that you don’t believe in or agree with the ideology, transphobic? And would it be transphobic to compromise by using they/them, instead of sexed pronouns?

I personally think as long as pronouns are gendered/sexed, it's rude not to use someone's preferred pronouns. That said, I think we should replace those pronouns with a singular gender-neutral pronoun. I'm also for eliminating gendered language. Cousin is a gender neutral term. Aunt and uncle refer to males and females. "Sibling" is gender neutral, unlike brother and sister. There is no reason to refer to someone's gender/sex unless it's relevant.

5. Why is opposition to putting adolescents on blockers transphobic?

This is one thing I somewhat agree with GC on. Children can be easily taken advantage of and don't have the brain development or experience to know this is what they truly want. I don't have an issue with teens taking hormones. When I was in high school, kids as young as 14 got tattoos with parental consent. IMO, the effects of tattoos are more permanent than the effects of hormones. So if you're old enough to get a tattoo, you're old enough to start hormones. I don't think SRS should be available to children under 18.

6. Why is the female sex wanting spaces, sports, etc to themselves for reasons based on safety and equality considered transphobic?

I don't think many spaces should be segregated by sex. For instance bathrooms. I don't care who is in the next stall or who I was my hands next to, as long as they aren't harassing me. There also shouldn't be gaps between stalls. Or locker rooms. There should be stalls for everyone to begin with with a lock that that says "vacant" in green and "occupied" in red.

7. Why is wanting a word/phrase (superstraight/gay/lesbian/bi) that clearly explains your fixed sexuality (which would simultaneously be accepting of the idea that a TW and woman is a lesbian relationship or a TM and a woman is a hetero relationship, just not a “super” one) transphobic?

It's not transphobic. However, the sub r/SuperStraight became transphobic.

8. Aside from the above, what else is transphobic, and why?

Many GCs think trans men are clueless. For instance, they say trans men transition to escape sexism, and on the other hand say trans men will always be treated as women no matter what. If trans men will always be treated as women no matter what, do they think trans men don't know that? So this counters their myth that trans men transition to escape misogyny. Do they think trans men are stupid or something? Plus read this article on the Washington Post called Crossing the divide. The section ‘I’ll never call the police again’ was written by a trans men. He experienced firsthand how men and women are treated differently. When he transitioned, sexism didn't end. Instead he traded in sexist experiences for other sexist experiences. People now see him as more threatening and not capable of being a victim of abuse.

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

  1. Agreed

  2. The question is why is it transphobic. “Opinions can be transphobic” doesn’t answer that yet that’s what three or four responses were. Sounds like you just decided it was but can’t explain how

  3. That’s not straight. My question and reasoning for it is pretty clear but if you don’t want to actually answer in a way that explains anything I’m not gonna push you. You seem to think making a declaration is an explanation. It’s not, you said what tras always say, I asked why they think sexuality and the terms that we have to describe sexualities don’t apply to them, and why it’s transphobic to acknowledge that.

  4. Another answer that doesn’t answer

  5. Surprised but agree about children, disagree about teens (under 18)

  6. Single stalls would be great but that’s not the question

  7. It wasn’t transphobic at all. They actually took a lot of care to make sure it wasn’t. But again you think what ever and whoever doesn’t agree with you is transphobic so...

  8. I don’t think you understand what gc thinks ans I wish you’d stop making comments as if you do

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

  1. Misgendering someone is transphobic.

  2. I'm straight I'm attracted to male-presenting people like Brad Pitt, LeBron James, Buck Angel, Zac Efron. I am not attracted to female-presenting people like Oprah, Megan Fox, Laverne Cox, or Jessica Alba. I personally know a trans woman who I was attracted to pre transition, even when she came out as trans. When she starting transitioning, even though she didn't pass as a cis woman, she appeared to feminized for me to be attracted to her. I'm not attracted to women because I'm straight. I'm attracted to male presenting people. I'm attracted to appearance, not internal organs. So that makes me straight.

  3. Misgendering someone/not respecting their gender identity is transphobic.

  4. I think you should have to be 16 to start hormones.

  5. To answer your question, why does it matter who is in the next stall, unless they are harassing you?

  6. Statements like "trans women aren't women" or "no gay man will date trans men" are transphobic.

  7. Then what do they think? I read r/GenderCritical and all their related subs for many years and still read Ovarit, s/GenderCritical, and I infer from what I read. I will never make a statement like "gender critical thinks XYZ" without backing it up.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

-1. Because you say so?

-2. If you’re a female attracted to females, even ones that look male, you are not straight. If you mean you can look at a passing Tm and find her attractive, but wouldn’t date her, I’d see that as straight, finding someone handsome objectively is not the same as being open to dating and sleeping with them. If you are open to having/have had sex with a female, and you are a female yourself, that’s literally not straight. That’s the whole point of my question ans once again, all you do is repeat yourself. That’s not an answer, it’s not an explanation.

-3. Because you say so?

Then I say a male using female pronouns and calling himself a woman is extremely misogynistic. It’s fact, I guess. Because I said it is.

-4. I think you should have to be an adult.

-5. Why are females not allowed to have their own spaces? Bathrooms are more than stalls, there are shared spaces in many bathrooms, and there are videos of TW masturbating in women’s rooms allover the internet, as well as a popular interview of two older TW admitting freely that they listen to women peeing in the stalls next to them. Women should be able to have spaces where they are free from male creeps who do those things, among other reasons. But I shouldn’t have to even offer a reason, females were given sex segregated spaces, they shouldn’t have to explain why they want to keep them. It’s not right for males to take them away by invading those spaces. Period. And you don’t answer questions by asking more questions. You answer questions with statements.

-6. Again, because you say so? You can’t prove that TW are women, and homosexual literally means same sex, whereas trans doesn’t mean you change sex, it means you modify your body to hopefully appear to be the opposite sex. So both statements you call transphobic are actually true.

-7. Again- you pick and choose which gc comments you want to represent what gc people think. And we don’t all think that. As evident by the gc posters here. None of us (maybe one or two exceptions here and there, sure. But that’s true for qt as well on certain subjects) say those things. Yet you’ve decided that’s what we all think. That’s ridiculous.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

masturbating in women’s rooms

  1. This is what society agreed.

  2. Trans men aren't females, except in the biological sense. They get treated as men by society.

  3. This is what most of us agreed on.

  4. Then you should have to be an adult to get a tattoo, body piercing or drive a car.

  5. I am a cis female. I see no need for those spaces. If someone is behaving like a creep, man, woman, no matter who, you report it. If they are not harassing you, they have the right to be there.

  6. Homosexual can also mean being attracted to people who appear the same sex.

  7. I didn't don't think all GCs, say that. Just the majority. Maybe if you can interpret those comments differently for me I may change my opinion.

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

  1. Apparently, not all of society agrees. Most of society agrees that TW aren’t women and TM aren’t men, so you may not want to go with that.

  2. Transmen are female, otherwise they wouldn’t be trans. And only passing and stealth TM are “treated like males”. If trans people were generally treated and perceived as the sex they wish to be perceived as, they’d not be doing all the bitching about how society sees and treats them that they do. And they’d not be a marginalized group, none of what’s going on in regards to gender ideology etc would be happening.

  3. No. This is what tras agree on. Not most people. And I didn’t ask if it’s agreed on, I asked why it’s transphobic. “Because we agree it is” is not an answer as to why

  4. In my experience you do have to be an adult to get a tattoo or a piercing, some times parents can give consent to a piercing, but piercings are not permanent, nor do they cause damage or inhibit development. There are strict guidelines to teens driving. And anyone can be irresponsible or get in an accident behind the wheel, not just teens. These are shitty comparisons.

  5. Oh! I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you got to make decisions for all females, even the ones who don’t feel safe or comfortable in spaces meant to keep them safe and comfortable. As long as you’re okay with it I guess any other female in the world just has to deal. I must have missed the announcement that GenderBEnder speaks for all females and makes decisions for us all.

  6. That’s not what homosexual means. It means same sex attracted. And even if it meant “appears to be same sex”, once clothes come off, trans people are distinguishable from the sex they wish they were, so they’d no longer appear to be that sex.

  7. Just because some people think that, doesn’t mean most people do. It’s that fucking simple. I don’t know how else to word this so you get it.

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

  1. It isn’t.

  2. It’s then root of all transphobia. The base requirement for any of it. Also fundamentally disrespectful to tell someone they don’t know who they are.

  3. Because that’s not technically correct. A woman attracted to trans women and natal women isn’t attracted to men. The term heterosexual provides inaccurate information. Also ultimately still calls trans women men.

  4. Again calling trans women men (and trans men women) is baseline transphobia. It disrespects their identity and autonomy. It’s just insulting. They/them is a fine compromise.

  5. It disrespects their medical autonomy, views transition as a negative outcome, it forced them to suffer the trauma of the wrong puberty, and ultimately it makes eventual passing harder which is the most important thing in social acceptance.

  6. It’s based on viewing trans women as men, which is the root of all transphobia (against trans women at any rate). Though I actually don’t think trans women can compete in sports at all.

  7. The establishment of a hierarchy and therefore the implied assertion trans people are lesser and that the inclusion of us is degrading is my issue with superstraight. A term that explicitly just excludes trans people without a hierarchy may have less issues. There may be more issues but honestly I just fundamentally don’t understand monosexualities.

  8. Prejudice against trans people, formal or informal discrimination, refusal of necessary services, lots of things. Medical discrimination and housing discrimination are extreme problems. In America it was legal to fire someone for being trans until last last year remember. ( It still is in some circumstances but they are ate least limited. I’ve personally been beaten up for being trans.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I feel like my comments to others have addressed all of this and I don’t have the patience to get into this with you at this moment. If the thread continues I may have an observation, comment or questions but right now I’m just gonna leave it and let someone who’s more patient address this if they want