QT/trans: What makes you want to be involved in the debate or advocating for trans rights? What would need to be achieved to make you stop?

submitted by peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (30 children)

Trans rights are based in reality and trans rights are women’s rights since trans women are women.

Edit: removed name calling

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (29 children)

No personal attacks. This includes insults, inquiring into a person's appearance or passability, name-calling, and accusations of bigotry/transphobia/fetishism

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (28 children)

I mean I didn’t say that they were a bigot only unnamed people who believe such things

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (27 children)

Unnamed people like all gc posters here? Real slick.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (26 children)

I mean it’s very common for you all to accuse tra of being misogynistic. Do you come down on those people too?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (25 children)

Gc tend to provide explanations of why the person is being misogynistic. You’ve never indicated why it’s bigoted other than “TWAW, it just is”.

Why is it bigotry to disagree with TWAW? Why is it bigotry to say females have rights that males cannot impede regardless of gender identity? What human rights are being denied to transgender people? Is recognition of gender identity a human right?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (24 children)

So if I can provide justifications I can call someone a bigot, or do they also need to be justifications that you agree with? Also the rules don’t mention any of this “provide justifications” business but rather seem to flat out disallow accusations of bigotry all together. Might want to change the rules to be more clear if that isn’t the case.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (20 children)

Take it up with the mods if you feel you need to be able to say people are bigoted here.

I don’t have to agree with it, it just needs to exist and be rational.

What is unreasonable about gc concerns when there is proof of harm from letting in males? (As the majority of humanity understand the term, not a small faction of white americanised western people)

What is unreasonable about our desire to preserve language that describes only adult human females?

What is unreasonable about not caring that people have gender identities?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (19 children)

I don’t I’m just saying that if I need justifications to call someone a bigot it isn’t what the rules say, and if the mods have to agree with my justifications when they and I see the issues very differently then that doesn’t seem very fair.

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

We have one gc (I think?) mod, one trans mod, and one “confused” but I’d say based on their comments qt mod. There’s no reason to act as if they’d automatically see things differently.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

So applying the rule isn’t fair, applying it the same way you applied it to tra getting called misogynistic isn’t ok, and nobody suggested mods have to agree with any justification you might have so idk where you’ve pulled that one from.

What would be fair? The rule not applying to you? Cause what I’m getting it that you have no justification for calling anyone here bigoted but still find the rule blanket banning doing just that unfair?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

I disagree that there are harms and that trans women are male, and I’m pretty sure that appeals to the majority concerning definitions is a fallacy

Because such language is outdated due to the understanding that sex is a spectrum

I mean caring about anything is subjective so it’s not wrong per say, but I would say that in the current context it can lead to negative circumstances for trans people

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

I think any justifications you provide would need to be based on more than tra consensus and your personal beliefs.

But yeah, personally, for me specifically, if you could prove that I’m a bigot I’d accept you calling me one. So not necessarily things I agree with, but specifically things rooted in fact, as opposed to “you’re transphobic because tras agree you are” and also not “you’re transphobic simply for not believing in my ideology”

The sub has the rule Houseplant posted as well as a “no misogyny” rule. There’s no “you can’t call out misogynistic comments” rule

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

Then there appears to be a conflict in the rules as there is no “justification exemption” to the rule banning accusations of bigotry. If this isn’t the case then the rules should be made clearer.

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

I agree the rules should be clearer. But as I said, I’m fine with you calling me a bigot of you can prove that I am one. As long as your “proof” isn’t based on us not believing the same things, but actual facts.