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 →

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (7 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So...you'll stop using outdated publishing norms revolving around sexual assault and male supremacy to claim what women TruLy WaNt, right?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? 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

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

This is ridiculous claim. Gender ideology activists want gender norms to hold on, so there can be non-binary and so "transition" is possible. Gender Critical people are critical of the concept of gender and want to remove it completely, as it is almost always harmful to women and sometimes harmful to men. Saying that GC want gender norms to be rigid or that any shuffling between gender norms is removing them is complete opposite to the whole idea of GC.

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

This is ridiculous claim.

I've seen it made when gc wants to point to gender non conformity it approves of.

Gender ideology activists want gender norms to hold on, so there can be non-binary and so "transition" is possible.

I don't think the qt side frequently makes contradictory positions that don't make sense.

To summarise, they often claim to be entirely constructionist but also support trans claims when they are essentialist.

It does not make sense.

Gender Critical people are critical of the concept of gender and want to remove it completely,

Which I don't think many people find realistic.

as it is almost always harmful to women and sometimes harmful to men. Saying that GC want gender norms to be rigid or that any shuffling between gender norms is removing them is complete opposite to the whole idea of GC.

I do think gc generally wants rigid gender norms.

But I do think it makes false claims about change from things that aren't considered commonly non conforming.

In general I'd compare it to sexual orientation. If orientation was like gender expression.

QT might say people ought to be free to have any orientation. At the same time they might accept someone linking their sexuality to their sex as a norm. It's contradictory if you think there are no natural links.

GC might say people ought to be free to have any orientation and that people ought to break the heterosexual normality. But it's unclear what that would mean. Would everyone be bisexual? Would there be equal gay and straight people?

I'm not saying this is what qt and gc are debating I'm making a comparison to a related to topic to show how I see the argument.

I'd say orientation is natural and strongly correlated to sex.

I'd also say orientation is strongly correlated to gender expression.

GC might say why would a straight crossdresser say that? Well because straight crossdressers are rarer. In surveys most crossdressers are at least bisexual. The majority are same sex attracted, or bi.

[–]TheOnyxGoddess 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

I do think gc generally wants rigid gender norms.

No, we don't. As you can tell majority of us love mocking TRAs gender stereotype posts and we have a few rabid radicals who are trying to erase a concept that came about from basic pattern recognition from people just observing their local culture. Gendercriticals, just hate the reasoning behind the trans movement and majority of us know the difference between "correlation" of human physiology to sex and not "causation". In other words, we know there's no "female" or "male" brain or special sex-based biological network in a person's body which makes the brain and the body argue whatever sex they are and therefore determine that you would want to wear a dress and high heels.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

That was a typo. It meant to read "don't." I actually thought I'd fixed that.

Though the relationship is complicated in that I see some gc wanting masculinity only.

[–]TheOnyxGoddess 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What do you mean by "wanting masculinity only"?

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

The idea that femininity is wrong, created by men for men and unnecessary. There is no reason to enjoy it or express with that is not debasing, fetishizing and collaborating. That we should progress without it. If everyone was masculine then we wouldn't have masculine or feminine.

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

You're going to find that those people are the people outright denying the existence of gender stereotypes. They are right in the sense that it's just a concept, made up by humans needing to categorise things and at the end of the day, we're all humans, but they are wrong in thinking that these words and made up concepts, contribute no value in how we should universally articulate and analyse the group's behaviour, attitudes and their rationale.

They don't so much blame "feminity", (as far as I have seen so far) but "toxic masculinity". They blame the misogynistic system set up by males that has mainly oppressed women into lesser roles throughout different periods of time and essentially made women dependent on males and fostered a culture of multilevel abuse and exploitation (from outright where we can all see it or something subtle that it's hard to see the clear line) of women that is continuing into today's psyche (e.g. women are still percieved as being incapable of technical skills such as programming, women are expected to think about how to manage finances and maintain the house when their husbands should be doing the exact same thing as well). They think that males today are perpetuating weaker, dependent attitudes to define femininty, what they don't understand that some women are also encouraging it themselves and often that's without an intentional push from males (some males express they like weaker women, some express they like stronger women and the onky ones who care are stupid). However, I'm saying this in a first-world western country perspective, you go to a backwater third world country and you are more likely to get something a bit more extreme where some societies care about treating girls and women as properties and denying their right to get the same opportunities as the males which seek to have a free living sex doll, housekeeper and babymaker, but no matter, it doesn't invalidate the observations of the behaviours, perspectives, beliefs and interactions females and males have amongst with themselves and with each other (and yes, that can be worded, much shorter, by using the words "femininty" and "masculinity").

You see how I use those sexist words they hate right? If those words didn't exist then it would be harder to identify and communicate specific gender issues to people. Now what many do not see is that, just because those words, spoken in a sociological analysis context exist, it doesn't mean we are as bound by a bunch of labels as they think and need to learn to stop being sensitive if we're still calling female police officers "policeman".

I understand I veered off a bit, but I'm trying to explain it's not masculinity they want and nor do they hate femininity as they claim, as they're expressing hate, but it's the fact they hate the gender stereotypes that existed as a result of male oppression and are still existing in many societies psyche, however, they don't seem to realise that slowly, these stereotypes people percieve impact them a lot less than they think and they are slowly changing for the better. There's some validity to their claim, but they're also socially tone-death about communication and ignorant about human thought processess and seek to pick a battle with how humans communicate that makes the feminism movement look like a joke (e.g. restructuring an entire language which has words that are categorised as "feminine" and "masculine" thinking that will make massive impact in improving gender equality).