Getting around the "don't use TERF" rule?

submitted by BiologyIsReal from (self.GCdebatesQT)

So, recently certain user has been using the acronym TEGCF in comments. I asked if it mean trans exclusionary gender critical feminist and said user confirmed it. This user says the mods of the old sub were fine with this. Is that true?

This user could have refere to us as GC or whatever, but instead chose to use an acronym that is pretty close to "TERF". I'm not buying for a second that this is not intended as a slur. The sub rules favour the QT position already! We can't misgender them, but they can call us "cis" and acuse us of genocide and a long etcetera for goodness sake. So, why do they get not to comply with the no use of "TERF" rule, too?

Edit: and after being called out, now this user is using TCGCF where the C stands for critical. Can we a clarification about what is and isn't allowed in this sub?

top 100 commentsshow all 197
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (55 children)

Mods allow the same dweeb to call us nazis and bigots and whatever else, and allow him to mock Holocaust victims by comparing them to teenagers killing themselves over not getting off label chemo drugs.

The rules are decorations on the page.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (54 children)

I removed the rule breaking comments that I made. Meanwhile this user constantly misgenders people and gets away with it. Also misgendering and name calling are not allowed. Reported

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

I correctly identify the sex of people for the same reason I don’t say amen.

An Internet forum cannot force me to use the language of a religious dogma and that is all gender identity is as far as I’m concerned. Keep in mind your own philosophy means that this is a perfectly valid interpretation that you cannot call wrong.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

If pronouns refer to “sex” then how come we give them to objects mic drop

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

Everyone clapped. Obama was there. Wow some douchebags call their cars she so obviously pronouns don’t relate to sex at all. Genius. Bravo.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

“I’d like to thank all the house plants I smoked to get here”

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (10 children)

Because you don't care about the rules because you know they aren't enforced and your audience doesn't care*.

It's literally right there in the rules, and you openly admit to breaking them, and will not be punished. But hey at least I can break them too and not be banned so small victories I guess.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

Oh goody someone else to make silly presumptions about me all day long.

I explained why I use sexed pronouns right there. Take it or leave it, but the commentary is real boring.

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

Yeah, I know, I read it, just felt like paraphrasing your words to something more coherent, cutting out all the buzzwords and dramatics and what not. :)

You break the rules because you don't care about them and know you can.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Lol, whatever you say. Carry on misinterpreting me and thinking you’re correcting me about my own opinions. Apparently that makes y’all feel clever.

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

House there's nothing opinionated here. It's in the rules. I know you have trouble reading but come on, you have to put in a tiny modicum of effort sometimes.

The rules about language usage will not be changed. Use of TERF, MTT, FTT, TIF, TIM, and the t-slur and misgendering of other users is not permitted.

But again, we've both broken them and had the reports ignored so we can safely put the matter to bed because they don't matter. :)

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

My opinion is that gendered pronouns are part of a religion I do not subscribe to.

Faith in an internal man or woman essence who cannot be described and cannot be experienced by anyone but the individual.

The rules do not state I must obey preferred gendered pronouns. They say I can’t call you a tim or a shortened term for a transistor.

If the matter could be put to bed, why did you bring it up at all? Assumed you’d been more devastatingly clever than you were?

[–]Greensquidsphone 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

House I don't need to be devastatingly clever, my 5 year old nephew has better reading comprehension skills than you.

The rules about language usage will not be changed. Use of TERF, MTT, FTT, TIF, TIM, and the t-slur and misgendering of other users is not permitted.

and misgendering of other users is not permitted.

not

permitted

I can't make it clearer for you. I couldn't if I tried.

What I mean to say is that it's wholly irrelevant, I just keep responding in disbelief at how brazenly ignorant you are. I can't help myself, it's like slowing down on the road to see an accident.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (38 children)

She’s not misgendering. She’s properly sexing. I don’t see a rule about that. If we have to accept being called “cis”, we should be allowed to use sex based pronouns.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (37 children)

So then what does count as misgendering?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (36 children)

Misgendering is an illusion ;)

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (32 children)

Ha, good one. If nothing is real, then gender identity isn't real either.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (31 children)

And cis women aren’t real either. It’s just your identity

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

And cis women aren’t real either.

I'm 100% in agreement with this.

It’s just your identity

I do NOT identify as cis. Why can't QT understand this?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

Sure you do, society slapped a label on you and you agree with it.

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

No, I don't identify with any label. I don't identify as woman, but I know I am a woman. And, while I'm not what you call a tomboy, I'm not particularly a femenine woman, either. I reject the idea that women must be a XYZ way and men must be a ABC way.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (25 children)

Yes. If a female calls herself “cis” she’s agreeing that she identifies as a woman based on sexist stereotypes. So I agree, “cis women” aren’t real. It’s a sexist label they apply to make men feel validated. Women, however are real.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (24 children)

Cis isn’t based on stereotypes, it’s based on you agreeing with the socially constructed label that was applied to you by others

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (23 children)

The socially constructed label is the stereotype lmao

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

Then I cast “counter spell”

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Counter spells are social constructs.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Nah social constructs are in the school of social conjuration.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

I really wish they’d address the misgendering rule and usage of “cis” as well as elaborate on the “no misogyny” rule

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I almost wish I’d have taken up on the offer of being a new mod last week.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

Oh good lord that would be terrifying 😬 You’re by far the worst rule breaker I found while scrolling through posts

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

This is why I made this thread. I understand that there is a need to compromise in certain language in this sub, but we shouldn't be the only ones who are expected to be civil here.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (10 children)

Lol pull the other leg

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

What?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (8 children)

It’s an idiom meaning that I consider what you are saying to be so ridiculous that you must be joking

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Ah. Why is it ridiculous? I try hard to comply with the rules, even if I would prefer to be more direct with my language. I can't say the same about some QT users with all the acusations of genocide and threats of suicide.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (6 children)

Houseplant literally just misgendered me and called me a name, and you think that GC is the only side that is expected to be civil? You don’t see how I might disagree with that statement?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

He cries after calling people nazis and bigots and accusing people of imaginary genocides and ~misgendering~ me in the middle of a reporting crusade over misgendering.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

Misgendering reported

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don’t care. You don’t need to tell me every time you prove you’re a hypocrite. You might as well be saying “pls notice me”

[–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

As far as I saw, you were the one who started with the comparisons with nazis and acuse her and other of causing millions of suicides. That is why I and other GC users think the rules are in favour of the QT position.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

The nazi comparison was not allowed so I removed it, also I said thousands (not millions) of suicides can be attributed to transphobic ideologies influencing lawmakers of which TCGC is one of

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (7 children)

Seriously though, what qualifies as misgendering if using the wrong pronouns doesn’t count?

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

You’d have to ask someone who believes in misgendering.

I don’t, for two reasons

  1. I think pronouns are sexed. So I could mistake a passing trans person and “mis-sex” them, but I can’t misgender someone

  2. Pronouns aren’t choices, they are split second observations

If someone appears male, imma call him he. Even if it’s obvious that they are trying to appear female, because I can see that they are male and I’m not going to lie to myself or to them. If the person I see that I assume to be male is revealed to be a transman, imma call her she. Because now I have information that clarifies their sex for me, and it would be incorrect to call a female “he”.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (5 children)

If you admit that your perception of what constitutes a “male” appearance can be wrong, then surely it follows that to some degree you standard is based on stereotypes as it’s impossible for a “woman” to have a “male” appearance, ergo your standards for male and female appearances exclude some actual “males” and “females”. Gender conformers are gonna conform though I guess

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I’m saying that secondary sex characteristics are typically indicative of sex. So if someone appears male I will assume they are, unless I have accurate information that tells me otherwise. Has nothing to do with hair length or clothing or being gnc, it’s about their actual body and what sex markers they have. Yes, women and men tend to have different features... it’s kinda why trans people transition.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (3 children)

So you’re saying some women have a “male” appearance? You can’t have it both ways, either your standards of what constitutes a “female” appearance includes those aforementioned women, or it does not, and if it’s the latter it seems sexist.

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

I literally referred to transmen. What the fuck are you even talking about? Yes, a female who is trans can surgically and hormonally alter her body with the intention of appearing male. So yes, in that instance, if she’s successful, she would have a male appearance (until she was undressed). Secondary sex characteristics (the only characteristics that trans people can effectively alter) are typically indicative of sex (hence why trans people alter them). I also said if I was aware that they were female I would adjust the pronouns I used. It’s not sexist to say that sex features are typically indicative of sex, but that changing those features doesn’t change their sex.

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

she would have a male appearance

This is the part that should be impossible if your a feminist who believes that transition doesn’t change your sex. They would always have a “female” appearance because any appearance they would have would be a “female” appearance. You don’t say that abnormally tall “women” have a “male” height do you? You don’t say that “women” with facial hair have “male” facial hair do you? You are stereotyping

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

Having surgery or taking hormones for their side effects doesn’t change sex. It changes your appearance. It would take a combination of altered sex characteristics to confuse sex. Having facial hair or being tall in and of itself is not enough. It’s really ignorant to pretend that you don’t understand what secondary sex characteristics are or what I’m talking about. I didn’t say if I see a tall woman I assume she’s a man, I didn’t say if I see a woman with facial hair I assume she’s a man. If I see a woman who looks like Buck Angel (and I don’t know it’s buck angel so I don’t know she’s trans) I will likely think she is a man. Because her over all appearance, more than just her height or her beard, her entire exterior appearance that I can see, indicates male. Because she intentionally made those alterations. I’m not stereotyping anything, stereotyping would be me saying that buck angel is a man because she changed her appearance to resemble one. In fact, me saying that those alterations doesn’t change her sex is the opposite of stereotyping.

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

u/Heimdeklefi can we get that matrix now? I showed you how to link it and you said okay, so we’re waiting

[–]censorshipment 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (56 children)

This user says the mods of the old sub were fine with this. Is that true?

Nope. The user is lying. Also, beware that TRAs are trying to make "FART" a thing. It's a slur.

It stands for Feminist-Appropriating Radical Transphobe, according to the larping males who colonized the actuallesbians subreddit.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (49 children)

What are they saying FART stands for?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (48 children)

Feminist appropriating radical transphobe.

They’re chuckling all over Reddit about it as if it’s clever and not just typical boys laughing because farts.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (47 children)

I love how they can’t discredit any of our arguments so they just try to come up with names they think are mean lol.

Well that, and constantly threaten us with rape ans murder.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (45 children)

It’s pathetic until it’s scary.

It does say a lot that they instantly resort to personal attacks or silencing, rather than just debunking us if we’re so wrong.

Ripping out someone’s tongue tells the world you’re afraid of what they will say.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (44 children)

Sure, that’s why everyone wanted to rip out Trump’s tongue, because they were scared of all the truths he might start saying /s

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (41 children)

Do you understand that there’s a huge difference in wanting to rip out one specific man’s tongue, when you feel he is dangerous and causes harm, and wanting to rip out the tongues of the millions of women who did nothing but disagree with you and fight for their rights?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

He can’t tell the difference between a metaphor and a threat of violence, understanding discussion of class groups would kill him instantly.

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

This is exactly it

load more comments (1 reply)

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (37 children)

    I mean ripping out tongues is gross, I was just pointing out the flaw in the logic of “if you want someone silenced you must be scared of what they’re saying”. You can want people silenced because you think they’re offensive and that their speech is harmful to the public good.

    [–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (36 children)

    She didn’t say (nor did I) that they were afraid of what we say so I’m not sure where you got that.

    What we said was that they mock or threaten us instead of debunking what we say.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (35 children)

    Yes he did

    Ripping out someone’s tongue tells the world you’re afraid of what they will say.

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

    Reach a little further and you’ll touch the fuckin sun lmao.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

    I didn’t know that we had two

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

    That must be why ol’ Gallus Mag loves posing with her guns pointed at the camera so much. Self defense /s

    [–]BiologyIsReal[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    Good to know. It sounded suspicius to me, but I wasn't in the old sub.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (3 children)

    They’re wrong, I most certainly received permission. That was the old sub though so if it’s now longer allowed I’ll change it.

    [–]grixitperson 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    it is not allowed

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

    I most certainly am not. Flap said it was okay

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (59 children)

    I myself am GC and I wanted a term to differentiate Trans critical and trans inclusive branches of GC. I’ll happily change terms though if people don’t like TEGCF I just thought that since it was unpronounceable that it wouldn’t be able to be made into a slur due to lack of “chantability”. It was fine on the old sub

    [–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

    How the hell are you GC?

    And can you link any info on trans inclusive gc? What does that even mean? What do they believe and advocate for?

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (14 children)

    I believe that gender should be abolished as I see it as a net negative concept. Like marriage

    [–]loveSloaneDebate King 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

    But you think sex is a matrix and want males to access female rights and spaces. That is not gc at all.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (12 children)

    I am critical of gender as a concept, ergo GC. You guys don’t have a lock on the term, unless...Are you the long lost queen of GC!?! 😲🙇🏻‍♀️💁🏻‍♀️👑

    [–]loveSloaneDebate King 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

    I guess you’re right. I’m a transwoman now.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (10 children)

    Great another tran maiden

    [–]loveSloaneDebate King 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

    I’m not a trans handmaiden, I’m a transwoman.

    Just realized I’ll be the first transwoman to give birth! I’m gonna make history.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (8 children)

    It’s not “trans maiden” it’s “tran maiden”. You have to drop the “s” on trans for it to rhyme properly. Also woah there you haven’t even earned your first badge yet, pollywog. You can’t just go straight to “trans woman”. You require more transing first.

    [–]loveSloaneDebate King 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

    Tran(s) and maiden don’t rhyme...

    And I don’t require more transing, I identify as a transwoman.

    [–]BiologyIsReal[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (42 children)

    If you think you're GC, then you don't really understand our position at all.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (41 children)

    It’s not just your position though. Are you saying that me wanting gender to be abolished doesn’t make me critical of gender?

    [–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (40 children)

    How is not my position? What do you mean by abolishing gender? Because, as I understand it, if you abolished gender then only sex would persist. And you couldn't identify into the opposite sex because there wouldn't be gender stereotypes to base your gender identity.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (39 children)

    Gender identity isn’t based on stereotypes, it’s based on imprinting on sex trait groups . Like ducklings. If gender was abolished people would still want to resemble the appearances of the people around them, but they wouldn’t label those appearances as naturally belonging into different social groups. Like if you got rid of countries and citizenship but still wanted to live in the same area as before.

    [–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (25 children)

    Sources needed for imprinting theory.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (24 children)

    You’re looking at the source (moi), though I’ve also heard others formulate something similar. As far as I can tell there haven’t been any studies on the matter.

    [–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (23 children)

    So you think that your ideas are correct, without accepting criticism of them, and they are based on your experience and the anecdotes of others.

    And we’re supposed to take you seriously and treat your ideas as fact.

    Dunning Kruger turned up to 11.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (22 children)

    I’ll accept criticism of my hypothesis that is logical and fact based. Also in the absence of hard data how else would I formulate my hypothesis?

    I mean seriously considering an idea is a sign of intellectual neutrality, but no you don’t have to take it as fact.

    [–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

    Did you ever draw out that matrix? If so, can we see it? You know, since your hypothesis is logical and fact based.

    [–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

    Formulate as much as you like but don’t expect anyone else to treat it as anything more than your personal opinion on the matter. Presenting it as fact is funny, presenting it as fact with commentary on the intellect of others is fuckin hilarious though.

    [–]BiologyIsReal[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

    Really? You're saying is not based in sex stereotypes? And why do trans identified people want to resemble the opposite sex if not because of sex stereotypes? Why does a good part of the diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria is about sterotypes then?

    [–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

    Also, how are we supposed to know that the male in the dress and heels with long hair and lipstick identifies as a woman if these stereotypical signifiers are not an expression of his gender identity?

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

    Exactly, it's not possible. Besides, trans people wouldn't like if we "misgender" them as result of not being able to know their gender identity.

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

    Never ever incorrectly guess what I feel about myself, never EVER point out that I display what I feel using stereotypes. Never ever ignore the stereotypes I insist have nothing to do with what I feel about myself.

    Basically read my mind you bigot.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (2 children)

    You shouldn’t be guessing people’s gender based on what they look like

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

    So, how does trans people pretend we don't misgender them? Mind reading?

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

    You can’t know someone’s gender from their appearance

    [–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    Then why get mad about being correctly sexed lol

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

    Because the rules are the rules. When I’m arguing with conservatives it doesn’t bother me as much because they have no rules about not misgendering, so I have no expectation of that small modicum of decency.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

    Why do cis women care about looking a certain way? Societal pressure to do so. If for instance society didn’t stigmatize women with beards, then trans women would not absorb that message and wouldn’t care about any facial hair that they might have. People’s instincts towards their appearances are calibrated by society’s values regardless of their trans status

    [–]BiologyIsReal[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Give me a break, trans natal males are not stigmatize for not living up to impossible female beauty standards. People just know they are not biologically female. Humans are just pretty good a telling the sexes appart.

    load more comments (1 reply)