Ok, it's time to update the rules

submitted by grixitperson[M] from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Penultimate_Penance 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (23 children)

I liked the old reddit GC debate QT rule where you couldn't use tim or tif, but you could write out trans identified male and trans identified female to avoid confusing people new to the debate. That rule made a lot of sense to me. We could have similar rules for AFAB and AMAB from the QT side.

Natal male and natal female also feels like conceding the point, because it implies that sex isn't set for life, that it could somehow be changed later on.

If someone demands atheists not use the Lord's Name in vain makes it impossible for atheists to effectively argue. Demanding that Gender Critical Users do the TRA equivalent of not using the Lord's Name in Vain aka using preferred pronouns and other language like AFAB and AMAB that all plays into the faith based belief in a gender identity and the erroneous idea that sex isn't set in stone.

Demanding preferred pronouns is too much. No one should have the right to impose their own subjective personal beliefs on the rest of society. GCs need to be able to effectively argue clearly and concisely without kneecapping our language to appease the faith based beliefs of our opponents. Some Qt people's fragility is not GCs problem, just like fundie religious people's fragility are not Atheist's problem. Deeply held beliefs should be just as open to challenge as any other belief.

We need to be able to say the emperor has no clothes, there is no gender soul, that person is a man, no one is born in the wrong body and clearly argue where the line between unchecked entitlement and actual civil rights issues should be drawn. If the QT side can accommodate the GC side on this I can tolerate them referring to people as Cis to make it easier for them to make their arguments and using their own terms that they are used to using, so they are not kneecapped either.

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

Irrelevant question: Did you have a different username on Reddit? Your phrasing seems familiar, but I don’t recognize your username

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

Yeah I did, but it was too closely linked to my real life so I changed it and used a more secure email for this account. With how virulent and violent many trans activists are I want to be as anonymous as feasibly possible. I don't want to deal with the McCarthy inquisition in real life if I can help it. Gosh it feels so weird having this level of totalitarianism coming from the left. Go figure, no political party or ideology is immune from tyranny. Got to push back no matter where it comes from even if I'm just doing it anonymously.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (19 children)

Ive never understood what difference it makes whether TiM/TiF, trans natal x, natal x, or just male/female are used. All seem equally GC in my view, so how is the preference for one over the other a compromise?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

Tim and tif were formulated to be inflammatory and evocative of the male name Tim and the female name Tiffany. It’s formulated as an insult.

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

Thats not actually true. It was formulated to avoid referring to trans women as women and to point out that they are males. You may not like it but it wasn't about the female name tiffany and it wasn't made to be insulting.

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

You will never convince me “Tim” being the acronym and also a common man’s name was a coincidence.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (15 children)

I’ve heard the logic I just don’t agree. I find that for me terms like male and female are just as or even more offensive than TiM of TiF. I would prefer them honestly.

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

That makes no sense to me at all. Tim is just male but purposefully more insulting.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

I don’t see how it is. It’s just a more con isn’t way of saying “male people who identify as trans women”. It seems functionally equivalent to calling trans people male. As for the “name” aspect I don’t consider names to be inherently gendered so it doesn’t bother me.

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

You are entitled to your opinion but we couldn’t be more disparate on this.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Of course.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I feel like TIM/TIF are always used by people think we are bad for most part. I read lots of GC content and it’s always negative towards the people those term refer to. Male and female can be neutral. If you feel like it’s in an insult to be male, that sort of is a personal hang up I feel like.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I never used it to be insulting, I didn’t realize it was used as an insult for a long time.

I’m not at all advocating for adding it as an acceptable term, just offering that for me, I preferred using it in some instances because I understood it to mean that a trans person identified as trans, as opposed to as a man or a woman. I guess it felt less misogynistic to me to think that a “tim” is a male with dysphoria who connects internally with his perception of women and wanting to appear as one- as opposed to truly thinking of himself as a woman, if that makes sense? my brain is a mess but it just seemed like a more accurate and less sexist way of saying “identify as a woman”. I didn’t realize that trans people were upset because the acronyms were gendered names, I thought they were upset because it implied they didn’t in fact identify as the opposite sex, only the desire to be the opposite sex.

In hindsight that was a pretty stupid interpretation for me lol

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

Hi loveSloane! Maybe it’s my fault for spending so much time lurking in GC spaces, but I feel like it’s the only group that uses those words and everything said using them is negative. Years ago, GC used MTT or FTT instead, but they moved to TIM/TIF because of the misgendering aspect. I can’t link anything anymore since it’s gone, but people on r/GC said as much. I feel like if you want to refer to a trans person neutrally while acknowledging sex, there are better ways. I’m sure you didn’t mean it in a negative way, but I feel like the words have baggage at this point (not unlike the terf slur, albeit to a lesser degree).

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

No I’m agreeing with you! lol just wording things badly. I’m saying I thought it was a neutral term and eventually realized it wasn’t. I was trying to say when I first heard of the terms I thought they had an entirely different meaning

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

Lol. It could be me too. I’ve been all over the place mentally this week. 😜

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

Nah it isn’t “being male” that is an insult, it’s “applying a term that I don’t believe actually exists” that is the insult. It’s the same feeling that GC presumably has towards the term “cis”. They’re not offender by being cis, they’re offended at having a term they believe is part of an opposite ideology applied to them that is offensive. In any case my point was that given that the more offensive term (to me personally) is allowed, then why ban people from saying a acronym that is functionally equivalent (and honestly a little less offensive to me personally as it’s at least in acronym form) but with that added utility of referencing trans women specifically? If the other trans people here view it as more insulting though I suppose that’s reason enough to ban it.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Nah it isn’t “being male” that is an insult, it’s “applying a term that I don’t believe actually exists” that is the insult.

So you’d equally put off if people insisted on saying you were female? I’m skeptical. :P

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

If they’re using it in a transmedicalist way to exclude people who haven’t gotten surgeries or hrt like I have? Yes I would be equally put off. If they’re using it as a gender label equivalent to the term “woman”? Then no I wouldn’t be put off.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You can’t accept male or female being just a biological term though, like it can only be transmedicalist or gender term? Does using it in a different way make the word real? I guess I feel like biology can be neutral and not wanting to accept biology is usually because of it being invalidating towards your gender feelings, which seems to be in line with your answer. If you would be okay with female, it’s seems clear it’s about gender feelings.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Not really. I don’t consider the use of “male” and “female” to be appropriate when used to describe biology because I believe that sex is a spectrum. Applying it to me therefore is exactly the same as applying “cis” to GC people, as neither of us thinks those terms are being legitimately used (presumably GC has no problems with the terms in chemistry). I accept biology and that sex traits exist I just disagree with the binary sex paradigm that classifies that biology into one of two idealized boxes. I would be fine with “female” as a gender term just as I am fine with “women” as a gender term, because again the issue I have is with the use of the terms is trying to apply an ideology that I don’t believe in too me, not the terms in and of themselves.

This is all I’ll say further on the matter as this topic is not the topic of the post, and I don’t want to derail the discussion. No offense of course :)

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

Just for the record I'm GC. I don't have a problem with the term cis as long as its referring to groups as a whole, like cis women or cis men. I feel like lately the term cis has been thrown about as an insult to specific posters on here who have repeatedly said they don't want to be referred to as cis. I think if people say they don't want to be referred to as cis then that should be upheld. In general - don't be an ahole. To me it seems like the sub moderation has slanted QT here on saidit, but the old sub got "its r/gendercritical pt 2" feedback from QT posters on reddit.