All: Why do a lot of trans people insist that being non binary or trans has nothing to to with stereotyoes, and then suddenly it really is about stereotypes?

submitted by questioningtw from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]adungitit 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (47 children)

So, you have no intention of actually rationalising your claim as usual? I guess it's my fault for expecting the programming to glitch when it's been working so well.

Ok, maybe you'll want to answer a different question: why do you and QT make claims you know are full of hot air when you know you'll have to do this humiliating little dance around it every time and how do you keep your dignity from intervening?

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (46 children)

My question was meant to progress the debate. To find out what you thought.

[–]adungitit 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (45 children)

If you say something, and you are asked to rationalise it, awkwardly derailing and avoiding the questions because you know you're full of hot air is not "progressing the debate". Debate cannot be had if one side knows they have no argument and instead expends all their efforts into trying to avert attention from the fact that they have no argument, hoping that this will somehow make it seem like they're not actually wrong just because they ignore and disengage from what proves them wrong.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (44 children)

To be honest you are the person here I find the most difficult to debate.

It comes across as a list of accusations.

[–]TheOnyxGoddess 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (10 children)

If you read this person's other posts, you'll know their perception of reality is heavily laced with self-victimisation and sociological inferences that "femininty" and "masculinity" are created by the patriarchy, the problem with that is those concepts are made to describe a series of patterns exhibited by society at the time (e.g most girls playing with dolls, not many boys play with dolls = dolls are a girl thing) and these patterns are separated into categories "feminine" and "masculine" in the observer's respective culture. It doesn't matter if it's because women are oppressed or not (analysis of this would be a separate topic, this is about observing society's patterns and behaviours in groups), the pattern is going to be there and observed as such and as society changes, what is feminine or masculine also changes, in other words, femininty and masculinity is dynamic. "Gender" cannot be "removed", it's just a dynamic category. The person you are arguing with is also sexist towards women, the group of women it's trying to support the rights of.

I'm at this point ready to say this person is a troll or some nutter who thinks that it has won an argument when a person stops posting. His logic has a lot more holes than a badly written plot

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (9 children)

the pattern is going to be there and observed as such and as society changes, what is feminine or masculine also changes, in other words, femininty and masculinity is dynamic. "Gender" cannot be "removed", it's just a dynamic category.

I agree or at least I think I do.

Masculine and feminine is dynamic to a degree.

However they are always going to emerge, because humans have a desire to gender things. Also in that sense gender non conformity is cross conformity.

Also the genders can't be so dynamic that they contradict physical reality.

But there can be behavioural traits as well as physical traits.

For instance criminality seems to have a universal higher rate among men.

I'm at this point ready to say this person is a troll or some nutter who thinks that it has won an argument when a person stops posting. His logic has a lot more holes than a badly written plot

Well they do claim to be a woman and I believe them. I do think they might be traumatized person. But their arguments are consistent with some in gc. But then I think gc is more than one group but also that the different gc positions ought to be formalised to a degree.

Both "gc" and "qt" have different schools of thought.

[–]TheOnyxGoddess 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Males are biologically stronger, they won the biological arms race before people started developing complex civilisations, the culture to commit what we would consider to be crimes today, was fostered and carried over and exhibited in those civilisations, of course there's going to be some level of consistency. We can also say that maybe males have more of a biological impulsive need to be assholes and to win Darwin Awards, but honestly, that seems more nurture than nature. We humans don't actually have the need to gender, we just happen to observe and noticed a pattern and sorted that information.

I wouldn't call it "cross conformity", originally we used "non-conformity" to describe if we don't match our respective gender's stereotype and by extension, how society percieves the individual. It makes zero sense to create another terminology to basically say "you share features of something in another category", much similar to non-binary and agender existing as a list of valid genders.

We can't change our genders (e.g. woman, man), but our gender stereotypes can be changed (how we see women and men).

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (7 children)

I wouldn't call it "cross conformity", originally we used "non-conformity" to describe if we don't match our respect gender's stereotype and by extension, how society percieves the individual. It makes zero sense to create another terminology to basically say "you share features of something in another category", much similar to non-binary and agender existing as a list of valid genders.

Well sure. But sometimes gc can be rather partisan on gender non conformity.

It can deny female non conformity is aligning with masculinity.

It can say female non conformity is good and male non conformity is bad. Indeed male conformity is often everything gc feminists are wanting to get away from.

But gender non conformity always selects gender norms.

If everyone was gender non conforming we would still have gender norms. Gender would not be abolished.

If half of the population of both sexes were gnc that would be more like it. Or if an equal portion were androgynous.

But we still run into physical elements that are mixed into "gender."

[–]TheOnyxGoddess 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

I don't know where you get the whole "male non conformity is bad.", but GC just hate that the non-conformity is being used as the basis for transition and have stated a couple of times that transwomen explanations are not just stupid, but also deluded, sexist and is also pseudoscience. The fact the trans movement is using the whole "I like this typical gender stereotype hobby" or "I act like this particular gender stereotype" destroys one of the aims of the feminist movement, to make society see past the person's sex and to give them a chance and treat them with equality and equity.

But gender non conformity always selects gender norms.

Gender norms is whatever that is observed in the society and established by what the majority of target study groups profile (e.g. majority of females sew and many of them like sewing, not many males sew and a lot don't like sewing) Gender non-conformity is to describe a person's diversion fron the gender stereotypical profile of observed behaviours in their respective local culture. It does not "select", it does not have a will of its own, for it is a concept and a word a person would use to describe someone in relation to their own society. It is as dynamic as gender-norms and is used to communicate what the user thinks and want to say.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

I don't know where you get the whole "male non conformity is bad.",

What male non conformity does gc generally like? There are always large sections of gc who don't like the reality of male gnc behaviour.

Good male gnc ends up being either something very mildly gnc or a "magical gnc super state" that exists virtually after all the actual forms of it are rejected.

but GC just hate that the non-conformity is being used as the basis for transition and have stated a couple of times that transwomen explanations are not just stupid, but also deluded, sexist and is also pseudoscience. The fact the trans movement is using the whole "I like this typical gender stereotype hobby" or "I act like this particular gender stereotype" destroys one of the aims of the feminist movement, to make society see past the person's sex and to give them a chance and treat them with equality and equity.

Well sure I get the idea. But it that still doesn't get around the gnc issue. There isn't actually something being other than masculinity or femininity. It's a binary and spectrum at best.

Gender norms is whatever that is observed in the society and established by what the majority of target study groups profile (e.g. majority of females sew and many of them like sewing, not many males sew and a lot don't like sewing) Gender non-conformity is to describe a person's diversion fron the gender stereotypical profile of observed behaviours in their respective local culture. It does not "select", it does not have a will of its own, for it is a concept and a word a person would use to describe someone in relation to their own society. It is as dynamic as gender-norms and is used to communicate what the user thinks and want to say.

Right it's dynamic and emergent. Almost like people naturally want to do "gender." It doesn't go away.

Aren't gnc people doing "gender" as well? The more gnc they are the more they are doing "gender."

[–]adungitit 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (32 children)

Debate is not "I'll vomit bullshit and then desperately try distract from said bullshit". That's either trolling or being an idiot, both of which cannot fascilitate debate. You are repeatedly given chances to explain yourself, and you use them to try and derail, worm your way out what you were saying, disappear, and then parrot the exact same stupidity elsewhere. That is not debate. Debate cannot be had if a person knows they're full of it and are still continuing to parrot the same broken nonsense because they think that if they just say it enough times, they can fool themselves and others into thinking it's true and that will make their bruised ego feel better. If you don't like being accused of bad faith, then start rationalising what you're saying, stop derailing, stop avoiding uncomfortable questions, learn to use your brain when making statements instead of just vomiting out the first thing that comes to mind and whining that you're victimised because you're full of shit.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (31 children)

Your claim is femininity is bad and a construction of the patriarchy.

I don't think that's how the majority of women view it. You disagree.

I don't see who you can have "good gender non conforming males" if you condemn femininity.

I'd also add the majority of women are attracted to masculinity.

Doesn't seem much point in deny these things.

[–]adungitit 7 insightful - 7 fun7 insightful - 6 fun8 insightful - 7 fun -  (20 children)

Wow, you actually said something instead of pathetically trying to worm out of your own words. Still didn't actually clarify what you were supposed to, but hey, we're getting there. Actually probably not. I doubt you'll be able to go beyond repeating "buh dick says girls like Chads".

Your claim is femininity is bad and a construction of the patriarchy.

It...objectively is? Women are not born in high heels and dresses. Hell, those things weren't even associated with women until relatively recently. More and more women are wearing "masculine" clothing, more and more are taking on "masculine" responsibilities that have always been denied to them. Men are whining about this the same as always and jerking each other off about how incapable women are and how much happier they were or would be back by their masters' feet, and women are trying to coddle their egos by promising that they can still be sexy for them even if they're "empowered". This has been happening even before women could vote.

Femininity and masculinity are objectively damaging for women. You can lie through your teeth that they're not, but both women's experiences and statistics speak for themselves.

I don't think that's how the majority of women view it.

Women trying to haggle with the patriarchy and compromise with the dominant class for their acceptance has always been the case, as well as men using normalised oppression of women as evidence that women like being oppressed. Women being groomed and brainwashed to accept their oppression is nothing new. Women used to accept they don't need to vote, or have careers, or go outside, or be educated, or deserve sexual satisfaction and that they deserve to be beaten and owned by their husbands. All of these have been used by men to argue that women are happy in their oppression.

I'd also add the majority of women are attracted to masculinity.

Let me guess, because romance novels? Those are getting pushed out by things like fanfics which show a variety that would never be apparent just from the stuff published based on what women should be into. Moreover, a lot of women are into "feminine" pop stars and gay men to the point of it being a joke. Women not enjoying misogynistic sex, being objectified and men pestering them to do things for male benefit is seen as an integral part of heterosexual relationships and while men indeed love it and as always insist that women do, too (with ofc infinite orgasms that they're giving them in this arrangement because they're just so good like that), most women have a different story to tell. The embarrassingly low rates of orgasm for straight (and bi) women, as well as widespread traumatic experiences tells a different story from the submissive-housewife-happy-in-her-place fairy tale. Men proclaim these as misandrist overreactions and/or just ignore them no matter how normal it is to hear them, and apply survivorship bias to any woman who's proudly stockhold-syndrome'd herself into liking the misogynistic androcentric status quo that is given to women as the only option, and avoid the masses of unhappy, neglected, anxious and traumatised women who are sick of male bullshit. This sort of wilful ignorance and lying through their teeth that men engage in for the sake of prettying up the status quo is different from women, who, even when they say things that men want them to say, are usually still either aware of or suffer from the negative impacts of the things that they're pretending to be okay with for the sake of patriarchal approval.

I don't see who you can have "good gender non conforming males" if you condemn femininity.

Most gender nonconforming male people are fetishists. They are "nonconforming" because their dicks get hard from taking on the role of inferior subhuman women. This is why misogyny is paradoxically (but actually not when you think about it) still the norm among them just like with conforming men. There is no difference between the two except what specific fetish they're jerking to (which they picked up from other men in the first place). Men do not perceive women as human beings, they perceive them as caricatures, dolls created for their entertainment, so to men, gender nonconformity has nothing to do with freeing oneself from the gender hierarchy from which they still derive their entire worldview from, and everything to do with donning a patriarchal costume, a male idea of a woman and all the inferiority contained in it. This is in stark contrast with how women do nonconformity and relate to men.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (19 children)

It...objectively is? Women are not born in high heels and dresses.

You think all of femininity comes down to that?

Hell, those things weren't even associated with women until relatively recently. More and more women are wearing "masculine" clothing, more and more are taking on "masculine" responsibilities that have always been denied to them.

You are conflating things to suggest that femininity is going away. It isn't.

Femininity in women continues.

Women can be in a position of power and still be feminine.

Women can express masculinity, that does not make them a better person that a woman who does not.

Men are whining about this the same as always and jerking each other off about how incapable women are and how much happier they were or would be back by their masters' feet, and women are trying to coddle their egos by promising that they can still be sexy for them even if they're "empowered". This has been happening even before women could vote.

This is an extreme position few men or women adhere to or believe in.

Femininity and masculinity are objectively damaging for women. You can lie through your teeth that they're not, but both women's experiences and statistics speak for themselves.

How are minor symbolic items objectively damaging for women?

This seems geared towards masculinity as the better norm.

Women trying to haggle with the patriarchy and compromise with the dominant class for their acceptance has always been the case, as well as men using normalised oppression of women as evidence that women like being oppressed.

I'm sorry I don't recognise this position.

To me you are denying women agency.

Those are getting pushed out by things like fanfics which show a variety that would never be apparent just from the stuff published based on what women should be into.

The variety does mean majority. Some are popular and some are not. Of course it's a spectrum but not an even spectrum.

Moreover, a lot of women are into "feminine" pop stars and gay men to the point of it being a joke.

I thought "feminine" was wrong.

If it's wrong for anyone to express it, it's surely wrong for anyone to enjoy it?

Even if it is a small minority.

Women not enjoying misogynistic sex, being objectified and men pestering them to do things for male benefit is seen as an integral part of heterosexual relationships and while men indeed love it and as always insist that women do, too (with ofc infinite orgasms that they're giving them in this arrangement because they're just so good like that), most women have a different story to tell. The embarrassingly low rates of orgasm for straight (and bi) women, as well as widespread traumatic experiences tells a different story from the submissive-housewife-happy-in-her-place fairy tale.

Heterosexual relationships could be better. I don't see these women being happier if they give up "femininity" or indeed men give up "masculinity."

Most gender nonconforming male people are fetishists. They are "nonconforming" because their dicks get hard from taking on the role of inferior subhuman women. This is why misogyny is paradoxically (but actually not when you think about it) still the norm among them just like with conforming men. There is no difference between the two except what specific fetish they're jerking to (which they picked up from other men in the first place). Men do not perceive women as human beings, they perceive them as caricatures, dolls created for their entertainment, so to men, gender nonconformity has nothing to do with freeing oneself from the gender hierarchy from which they still derive their entire worldview from, and everything to do with donning a patriarchal costume, a male idea of a woman and all the inferiority contained in it.

I'm sorry I find this an extreme position offers no way out. It condemns women and men. It condemns common sexual behaviour. It condemns non conforming sexual behaviour.

This is in stark contrast with how women do nonconformity and relate to men.

How?

Here's how it looks by your standards.

If a nonconforming woman likes masculine men then she is conforming to gender and fetishizing masculinity in men.

If a nonconforming woman likes feminine men then she is fetishizing femininity in men.

It doesn't make sense, except to condemn everyone.

[–]adungitit 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

You are conflating things to suggest that femininity is going away. It isn't.

Except...it is? Conservatives are raging that men and women are losing sight of what they're supposed to be. Previous generations would've been shocked at the state that gender roles are currently in.

This is an extreme position few men or women adhere to or believe in.

Wow, a man can lie through his teeth that misogyny isn't a widespread issue! Stop the presses! This changes everything!

Misogyny cannot simultaneously be "extremely rare position" and dominate society everywhere. Women cannot consistently be screwed over by men and gender norms going centuries back, and also have it "not happen" because...well, men can lie that it doesn't happen!

How are minor symbolic items objectively damaging for women?

I thought the mystical ethereal feminine essence cannot be defined in such simplistic material ways?

I'm sorry I don't recognise this position.

Wow, a man can lie through his teeth that misogyny isn't a widespread issue! Stop the presses! This changes everything!

To me you are denying women agency.

lmao a male supremacist jerking his dick to gender essentialism is talking about denying women agency. The lack of self-awareness is hilarious. Here's a tip: if you sound like a misogynistic piece of shit to yourself, that's a sign to reconsider your views, not to wank even harder.

The variety does mean majority.

Uh...ok? So...you'll stop using outdated publishing norms revolving around sexual assault and male supremacy to claim what women TruLy WaNt, right? Of course you won't.

I thought "feminine" was wrong.

You're trying to derail again. You claimed women are only into masculine men. I noted the fact that women constantly show interest in non-masculine men to the point of this being a joke, so the whole "women just go after alpha chads cuz ladybrains" mythology isn't making sense.

Heterosexual relationships could be better. I don't see these women being happier if they give up "femininity" or indeed men give up "masculinity."

lol I love how you acknowledge the problem exists, and then in typical male fashion switch to "but things are k as they are". Wow, a man can lie that misogyny isn't a problem! That changes everything!

I'm sorry I find this an extreme position offers no way out.

Great, so you've realised you have no way of making your bullshit make sense. Now are you going to stop repeating it?

Of course you won't.

How?

Nonconforming women do so because they want to be free from constant objectification that women are put though. They don't get off to being masculine, it's not a fetish, they just want to be seen as human beings, but under androcentrism, human=male (to the point of this literally being reflected in language), while women are caricatured aberrations. Women who think they're men do so because they can't associate themselves with these caricatured aberrations. Men who think of themselves as women do so because they think of women as caricatured aberrations, and get off to roleplaying that. Hence why misogyny reigns supreme even among the people who pretend they're all about "gender-fuckery", while in male communities it's straight up male supremacy, the sort that's the norm in any male community. Liberal feminist communities are more about trying to make the patriarchy empowering and waving their fingers at it only when it gets a bit too much, but they don't literally push overt male supremacist ideas and bioessentialism the way that all male communities do.

If a nonconforming woman likes masculine men then she is conforming to gender and fetishizing masculinity in men.

A woman who's brainwashed into liking masculinity is suffering from internalised misogyny. Masculinity is "fetishised" insofar as men are highly rewarded for being selfish, narcissistic and phallocentric, and women are told putting up with this is the only way heterosexuality is possible because men and their supremacist history are the ones who set up sexual norms.

If a nonconforming woman likes feminine men then she is fetishizing femininity in men.

It's almost like femininity exists in order to subjugate women, hence the misogynistic draw to it and the cycles of abuse and trauma that result from it!

But let me guess, you can simply lie through your teeth that these things aren't happening, and that will change everything.

It doesn't make sense, except to condemn everyone.

We'd never want to make men's dicks feel bad, would we?

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (17 children)

Except...it is? Conservatives are raging that men and women are losing sight of what they're supposed to be. Previous generations would've been shocked at the state that gender roles are currently in.

Conservatives often hold an extreme position of rigid gender norms that see anything less than super conformity as "the end of gender."

GC also sometimes take a position that anything less than rigid gender norms is "the end of gender."

Gender norms evolve but new ones emerge. There can be more gender equality in terms of economic, political, professional roles but gender carries on in new ways. Or only a minority is interested in that non conformity.

I thought the mystical ethereal feminine essence cannot be defined in such simplistic material ways?

I can think it is aggregate.

lmao a male supremacist jerking his dick to gender essentialism is talking about denying women agency.

This is derailing.

The variety does mean majority.

I mean variety does not mean majority.

So...you'll stop using outdated publishing norms revolving around sexual assault and male supremacy to claim what women TruLy WaNt, right? Of course you won't.

I think you're going against the majority of women here. I'm not in charge of women's tastes in erotica.

You claimed women are only into masculine men.

I said the majority are.

Exceptions prove the rule.

I noted the fact that women constantly show interest in non-masculine men to the point of this being a joke, so the whole "women just go after alpha chads cuz ladybrains" mythology isn't making sense.

They do not constant show interest in "non masculine men." It is a small minority and I can't imagine you would approve of them.

Nonconforming women do so because they want to be free from constant objectification that women are put though.

I would dispute this rationality.

I think non conforming, cross conforming women wan to express that masculinity first. Their expression comes before a reaction to men.

It happens to be that a lot, a majority, will be same sex attracted and therefore not want male attention.

They don't get off to being masculine, it's not a fetish, they just want to be seen as human beings,

Where would self declared autoandrophiliacs fit into this?

but under androcentrism, human=male (to the point of this literally being reflected in language), while women are caricatured aberrations.

Again I don't recognise this.

This is one group of behaviours is "bad stereotypes."

Whilst another is "freedom."

Women who think they're men do so because they can't associate themselves with these caricatured aberrations.

Where do feminine trans men fit into your model of this?

Men who think of themselves as women do so because they think of women as caricatured aberrations, and get off to roleplaying that. Hence why misogyny reigns supreme even among the people who pretend they're all about "gender-fuckery", while in male communities it's straight up male supremacy, the sort that's the norm in any male community. Liberal feminist communities are more about trying to make the patriarchy empowering and waving their fingers at it only when it gets a bit too much, but they don't literally push overt male supremacist ideas and bioessentialism the way that all male communities do.

This makes it sound like all relationships with men are the problem.

Which sounds like feminist seperatism.

I recall you have denounced women having relationships with in the past.

Is this your current position?

A woman who's brainwashed into liking masculinity is suffering from internalised misogyny.

But you also think women who like femininity have been brain washed.

I'm confused about how this is supposed to work.

Masculinity is "fetishised" insofar as men are highly rewarded for being selfish, narcissistic and phallocentric, and women are told putting up with this is the only way heterosexuality is possible because men and their supremacist history are the ones who set up sexual norms.

And how should it be?

You repeatedly define things by what they ought not to be not what like in things.

I've said plenty of things I like.

But what do you actually like?

We'd never want to make men's dicks feel bad, would we?

I'm for men and women finding sexual fulfilment.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Gender nonconformity does not mean "following femininity stereotypes". It means not following masculinity stereotypes.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (8 children)

But there are only two gender norms. How are they supposed to avoid both gender norms? What does that look like?

[–]adungitit 5 insightful - 6 fun5 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

I have asked you this before, and (unsurprisingly) you had no answer: what "gender" is preferring Coca Cola vs Pepsi? Which one is masculine and which is feminine?

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

If you are not conforming to gender norms, this means you are not conforming to gender norms - regardless if there two, three, five, million of them. It does not mean "I am not conforming to one norm, so I will follow second norm instead". What you are saying is called gender conformity - you are just conforming to other stereotype, not one that is expected from you.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

But I don't know how someone can be non conforming without conforming to the opposite gender norms.

Are they supposed to be a high percentage of mixed behaviours? Is that it?