QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist?

submitted by [deleted] from (self.GCdebatesQT)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 3 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 7 fun -  (92 children)

The sex binary is a part of gender. Sex trait combinations actually occur along a spectrum. With no artificial sex binary and the oppressive societies that they breed, people who are born with or desire different sex trait combinations won’t be stigmatized.

[–]adungitit 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (34 children)

Sex trait combinations actually occur along a spectrum

Almost all human beings, barring <1% of medical disorders, are male or female. This is a spectrum as much as a number of human limbs is a spectrum.

Men and women show natural variance in their male and female bodies - this doesn't make them the opposite sex. Sex isn't defined by secondary characteristics, hence why various developmental issues can affect the sexes while still making their sex apparent.

With no artificial sex binary

The reality of male and female bodies is not artificial. You can see that in a simple fact of mammalian reproduction.

With no artificial sex binary and the oppressive societies that they breed

This comes back to the pretty damn offensive idea that the problem with the patriarchy is simply down to those pesky females having to be female, and if they didn't, superior males wouldn't naturally abuse and subjugate them. Instead of fixing oppression, the victims are blamed for being different and facilitating said oppression through that because of the natural order.

people who are born with or desire different sex trait combinations won’t be stigmatized.

You are assuming that coveting opposite sex traits to the point of suicidal ideation and spending a lifetime on drugs in order to prevent your body from naturally producing the hormones that it's supposed to have, and amputating perfectly normal body parts just because you've convinced yourself your properly developed body parts are "wrong" or "defective" is in any way good for the person. Moreover, the patriarchal ideas internalised in these body parts are an almost unavoidable part of the motivation for removing or deforming them, and trans people aren't shy about stating it. There is a reason people obsess the most over removing the things that are loaded with social meaning, as opposed to, I dunno, one third of their toes.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 10 fun2 insightful - 9 fun3 insightful - 10 fun -  (33 children)

No, no humans are male or female because its a spectrum. Also the number of limbs on a human being is objectively not a fixed number, so yeah you could describe it as a spectrum.

All sex traits determine an individuals sex spectrum status, not just “primary” ones. The distinction is arbitrary.

Mammalian reproduction following a two gamete pattern does not show that their are only two sexes, because some people who don’t produce gametes. Since those people aren’t sexless, sex is based on anatomy and therefore a spectrum as sexual anatomy occurs in intermediate forms across a whole range of possible sex trait configurations.

It in no way supports such an idea? The issue is oppressive systems of thinking not people posessing certain sex trait configurations

Cis people and their noxious sytsems of oppression are what fuel the tendency for trans people to normalize their appearances in line with cis standards of appearance. I’m sorry, what was that you said about victim blaming? 🙄

[–]adungitit 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

no humans are male or female because its a spectrum.

How exactly do you think babies are made?

the number of limbs on a human being is objectively not a fixed number, so yeah you could describe it as a spectrum.

It is fixed, and the fact that developmental disorders exist doesn't change that.

All sex traits determine an individuals sex spectrum status, not just “primary” ones.

If you redefine sex to include things that it's not supposed to include, sure. But sex IS about primary characteristics, hence why doctors can still easily tell who's male or female regardless of secondary characteristics. They're not scratching their heads unless it's primary characteristics.

some people don’t produce gametes. Since those people aren’t sexless

They still develop the anatomy specifically for producing only one type of gamete. Infertility doesn't change the fact that the sexes develop in a consistent way to facilitate this. You can have malfunctioning equipment, but that doesn't mean the equipment isn't there, or worse yet, the fact that it's malfunctioning doesn't mean it cannot be defined according to its structure, development and purpose, or even worse yet, the fact that it's malfunctioning doesn't mean it can be defined as anything your heart desires. If you remove tires from a car or if a car stops working or hell, if a car is in a garage and isn't being used, that's still a car. It hasn't turned into a bird or a plane just because it doesn't serve its function.

The distinction is arbitrary.

Human reproduction certainly disagrees. No-one was prevented from getting pregnant just by believing in their pronouns hard enough, so the real arbiter has pretty consistently decided on this.

Do you think reproductive capabilities are a completely random throw of the dice? Why do you think mammalian sexes have developed in the first place? Why do you think there has never in the entire history of humanity been a single pregnant male or an impregnating female? Like literally never?

It in no way supports such an idea? The issue is oppressive systems of thinking not people posessing certain sex trait configurations

You've said that oppressive societies are bred by the sex binary. Were you specifically referring to societies oppressive to trans people, though? Because it sounds like you're not even considering patriarchal oppression in this arrangement.

Cis people and their noxious sytsems of oppression are what fuel the tendency for trans people to normalize their appearances in line with cis standards of appearance.

Are you saying that the only reason trans people transition is because of "cis oppression"? I don't think that's a sentiment most trans people would get behind.

Moreover, trans people objectively have no issues with their sex at all, like literally none. The only reason they think they have is because of a mental illness. At the end of the day, it's people who are convinced they should be something they're not, to the point of wanting unnecessary and damaging intervention on their bodies. It is something rooted in hatred of one's normal body, and that is in stark contrast with other oppressed groups. Trans people have more in common with body integrity disorder than intersex people.

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They still develop the anatomy specifically for producing only one type of gamete.

A little fix: "specifically to support only one type of gamete."

Full sex definition is something like "Female is a living organism that is grown with aim to support and/or produce large immovable gametes". it covers all species, except some mushrooms, bacteria and organizms which are cloning themselves (and even ones which are cloning can have sex, thought).

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (30 children)

some people who don’t produce gametes

Do you know that women are not producing gametes?

We are born with all gametes we will ever mature and release.

Do you know that pre-puberty no one is producing or maturing gametes? And that all women after menopause and all men after andropause are not producing or maturing gametes?

Do you know that during pregnancy women are not maturing any gametes?

Do you know that menstruation is body removing matured egg which was not fertilized with extra layer of endometrium which grown to become placenta? And only after that new egg from ovaries will start maturing and later be released.

If "producing gametes" was the definition of sex, then only men post puberty and pre andropause would be sexed, all other humans would be sexless!

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If "producing gametes" was the definition of sex, then only men post puberty and pre andropause would be sexed, all other humans would be sexless!

Yes. And even if we expanded the definition to "producing or releasing gametes," it would still mean most girls & women would be sexless 99% of the time during our prime reproductive years. Coz even during the approximately 40 years between menarche and menopause when female humans are capable of maturing and releasing eggs, we aren't capable of doing this all the time - or even most of the time. When not pregnant, on hormonal BC or breastfeeding, girls and women typically release an egg once every 28 days, for a total of 13 a year. Only males can produce sperm at will 24/7/365 and by the hundreds of millions each time.

Heimdekledi has a very male view of human sex. Either due to being utterly clueless about how female bodies work, or from choosing to ignore human female biology altogether coz its realities contradict the spurious claims that "no humans are male or female" and that "sexual anatomy occurs in intermediate forms across a whole range."

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (28 children)

It was intended to cover people whom could produce any sort of viable gamete at any point in their lives. This would be a gamete basis of sex after all.

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

No, it would not. It is pretty male-centric position and complete lack of understanding of females and our experiences, and our biology.

Supporting gamete type is not same as producing gametes.

That was more of a educational post anyways, so you can have some idea about us and our biology.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 7 fun -  (26 children)

A gamete must be formed in order for determination of sex based on gamete type to be used.

[–]adungitit 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It doesn't. The reason you (and other mammals) have the sex that you have is because your body was developed to facilitate production of one of only two gamete types, much like how a gun was made to shoot bullets and it doesn't stop being a gun the moment you stop shooting it, or if it's empty, or if it malfunctions. Your logic would be like defining a gun as "only the weapon that is currently in the process of successfully shooting bullets" and then claiming that guns aren't real.

The fact that gametes aren't produced 24/7 does not make the sexes stop existing, because the sexes never were defined according to this ability. Science has accounted for this, which is why male and female children or infertile or dead people are still male or female even if they aren't producing gametes: they have their anatomy in the first place because mammalian biology first needs a body specifically developed to produce one type of gamete before we can even talk about a gamete actually being produced. This is why humans have been able to successfully reproduce with each other for millions of years: You don't need to see someone's DNA or chromosomes to know whether they are human and whether they are male or female, that much is obvious just from looking at their body.

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

Biologists came up the idea of defining of sex based on whether one's anatomy is meant to support either male or female gametes because it applies to all sexually-reproducing plants and animals. It's the simplest criterion for sex, one that can be applied across the board to all the diverse species that reproduce sexually, and allows for the fact that there is great variation in the exact ways sexually reproducing plant and animal species reproduce.

But that doesn't mean gametes or potential (future or past) for gametes constitutes the only fundamental criteria for defining sex in all species. In humans, the primary sex characteristics include more than the organs where gametes come from (the ovaries and testes).

This is especially true for female humans, because we conceive, carry and grow gestating offspring inside our bodies, birth them when they are already well advanced in development, then (can) breastfeed them. As opposed to, say, female birds that lay their eggs after they've been fertilized internally so their offspring do much of their development outside their mothers' bodies. Or as opposed to female fish who lay their eggs unfertilized, then the males fertilize them afterwards. And as is different to female marsupials, who conceive & gestate their offspring inside organs within their abdominal cavities, and give birth to them when they are very young and still hardly developed, then keep & suckle them in pouches on their bellies for the rest of their development.

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

A gamete must be formed in order for determination of sex based on gamete type to be used.

But how exactly does gamete formation occur? You seem to have no idea about what happens during the various stages of oogenesis and how oogenesis differs from spermatogenesis.

https://study.com/academy/lesson/oogenesis-how-the-female-reproductive-system-produces-eggs.html

https://youtu.be/hKa57JPfKDE

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

I mean its been a while since freshman bio so I don’t remember the specifics of either, but the differences are immaterial in this discussion. The point was that if you’re going to determine sex by the gametes an individual has at any time had, then those individuals must actually have had gametes at some point, or else they’d be classified as sexless.

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

if you’re going to determine sex by the gametes an individual has at any time had, then those individuals must actually have had gametes at some point, or else they’d be classified as sexless.

But you're deliberately misrepresenting the definition. Sex isn't determined by "the gametes an individual has at any time," it's based on having physically developed early in life along the pathway meant to result in individuals having the potential capacity to produce or release one of the other of the two gamete types - ova or sperm - at a later point in life. In the case of humans, this potential capacity is alway time-limited to the phase in life that starts with/comes after puberty. For human females, the potential capacity is further limited to the approximately 40 years between menarche and menopause, and to the specific moment in every 28-day (on average) cycle when ovulation occurs.

In humans, whether an individual has the gonads meant to and capable producing one or the other type of gamete is not the sole determinant of sex. Sex in humans is determined by other primary sex characteristics, such as chromosomes and the presence or absence of other organs.

You know all this, of course. Just spelling it out for others.

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

It is formed once by our mothers, when they are pregnant with us. So only women pregnant with girls are producing ovums. And only once during that pregnancy.

[–]adungitit 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You are explaining that their understanding of gametes is faulty and they're interpreting everything you say as "Since gametes don't work that way, it means that gametes and their relation to sex cannot be understood".

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Their side just have very male-centric understanding of gametes, from a perspective of a male body. While for women/females what I am speaking is pretty clear and understandable and obvious. We are taking this for granted, forgetting that culture is very male-centric and mostly promoting male sexual reproduction, while shaming female's natural cycles and trying to hide them. So we should not forget that males (and sometimes even females) have no idea about our realities and trying to judge us based on how they would judge themselves or other males. That's why so much misunderstoonding, they are ignoring fact that our body works differently to theirs, and that we have different experience because of that.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (17 children)

Yes?

[–]VioletRemihomosexual female (aka - lesbian) 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

Yes.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 11 insightful - 7 fun11 insightful - 6 fun12 insightful - 7 fun -  (1 child)

Speaking of spectrums...

...did you ever make yours? You know, the matrix you said existed and that you’d map out and upload?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 6 fun8 insightful - 5 fun9 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Remember it can’t be presented in two or three dimensions. It needs a fourth dimension, six projectors, and the movie the matrix to be fact.

[–]AlexisK 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (54 children)

I can't understand how it is related to abolition of gender at all. Gender non conformity is what stigmatized by Gender Identity movement, as it says that there must be strict gender roles of how women or men should look, act or behave. Gender Critical position is mostly to abolish gender and to promote gender non-conformity, make it norm, so everyone can look and behave however they want. So, in general, it makes very little sense in real world what you are saying.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 10 fun1 insightful - 9 fun2 insightful - 10 fun -  (53 children)

You have no idea what the “Gender Identity movement” is about if you think that we support any sort of gender roles. We are the gnc people, unlike most of Gender Critical with their talk of “female appearances”. Lookin at you /u/loveSloane

[–]AlexisK 15 insightful - 4 fun15 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 4 fun -  (7 children)

We are the gnc people

Then why politicians are pushing for puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones? Then why Mermaids and GLAAD are saying that if girl is tomboy - she is boy? Then why transwomen and transmen are making all those surgeries to look like opposite sex?

If you are just gender non-conforming - why everything is so focused on being gender conforming to opposite sex?

This sounds like gaslighting, to be honest.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 8 fun1 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 8 fun -  (6 children)

Because those things are helpful for trans kids and teenagers. Mermaid and GLAAD aren’t saying that being a tomboy is inherently evidence of being trans. We have those surgeries because of cis people being more likely to abuse us when we don’t match cis normative appearance standards, just the same as cis people who have the same surgeries do.

Everything isn’t focused on conformity, that is just the part of the trans movement that you are focused on.

Literally not how gaslighting works. In order for it to be gaslighting I have to be lying to you about my thoughts and experiences and I’m not.

[–]AlexisK 13 insightful - 4 fun13 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Again.

If you are suffering from this conformity, then WHY you (as movement, politicians, organizations) are pushing this conformity so hard and demanding it? Why you are not fighting with GC feminists to abolish gender and instead reinforcing gender in laws? This just makes no sense. At all.

Mermaid and GLAAD aren’t saying that being a tomboy is inherently evidence of being trans.

Not sure about GLAAD, but Mermaids were saying that. I am not sure if they are saying this anymore, thought, as they changed their positions few times.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

We aren’t pushing conformity hard. Your side is though by working with right-wingers to further your goals. We are the ones who’ve gotten the supreme court to say that you can’t be fired for being GNC in your appearance.

Can you prove that Mermaid said any such thing?

[–]MarkTwainiac 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Literally not how gaslighting works. In order for it to be gaslighting I have to be lying to you about my thoughts and experiences and I’m not.

Huh? Gaslighting

is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or group, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment (Wikipedia)

To gaslight is to

manipulate (someone) by psychological means into questioning their own sanity (Oxford)

Gaslighting need not involve relating anything about the gaslighter's own "thoughts and experiences" at all, whether true or untrue. Often, it means lying about objective reality. Like whether the lights keep dimming and flickering as in the famous movie that gave rise to the term.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

Yes but the aspect of it being gaslighting was that the man knew what was occurring and lied to the woman about what was happening. Thats what makes it gaslighting

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

You're acting as though your earlier post said something different to what it did actually say. You said

Literally not how gaslighting works. In order for it to be gaslighting I have to be lying to you about my thoughts and experiences and I’m not.

Which was solipsistic and untrue. Now you say that in the movie, what made the man's behavior

gaslighting was that the man knew what was occurring and lied to the woman about what was happening.

Which is very different to what you first said. And you are still missing half the definition, the part that has to do with the gaslighter intentionally manipulating. The man in the movie didn't just "know what was occurring and lied" about it, he arranged what occurred with the intent of lying to the woman about it afterwards for the express purpose of making her doubt her own perceptions and sanity.

The man played by Charles Boyer in Gaslight intentionally altered the environment the woman played by Ingrid Bergman was in (her house) by turning down the gas that fueled the lights when he left the house in the evenings. Then he continually told her that what she had seen with her own eyes - the gaslight dimming & flickering - never actually happened, it was something she imagined - and was a sign of her being neurotic, anxious, untrustworthy and most likely off her rocker.

Your claim that intentionally lying to someone else is gaslighting is not true. Even intentionally lying about something consistently over time isn't gaslighting. Gaslighting by definition involves using manipulation to try to make another person or persons doubt their own sanity.

Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton continually lied to advance their political careers and save their own asses. Bernie Madoff lied to his clients about their financial holdings for years. Many people lie on their tax forms. We all sometimes tell lies to make other people feel better: The new outfit you bought looks great on you. I'll think of you every moment you're away. The dinner you've cooked is delicious. None of these kinds of lies are gaslighting.

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

I don’t see how what Im saying is any different from what you’re saying. The man had to lie about what was actually reality in order to manipulate her into doubting her own sense of reality. That description matches all given definitions

[–]kwallio 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

You're so funny.

We are the gnc people

Where would trans ppl be without gender roles and stereotyped gender presentation

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 7 fun -  (8 children)

Um better off trans people?

[–]kwallio 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Trans aren't GNC. They literally conform to gender stereotypes, thats why they're trans. You're not doing anything revolutionary, just reinforcing gender stereotypes that hurt women.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (4 children)

It’s not about conforming to societal stereotypes its about group identification

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

And those groups are defined..how?

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

Via an instinct that cues off of certain biological traits in people (presumably some of the same traits that infants use to discern the sex of their parents) that exist in the individuals environment and then modulated through exposure to preexisting societal gender categories.

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

Infants discern the differences between their parents and other persons they interact with, and many of these differences are sex-linked. However, I think it's a stretch to say this means they "discern the sex of their parents."

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

This is just biological essentialism. Gender is not biology, biology is not gender. Do better, please.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

The more I read your comments, the more I realize how hilarious you really are 😂 I mean this in the absolute nicest way possible, thank you!

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 6 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Aw thanks

[–]Penultimate_Penance 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

You do understand that transitioning is conforming to a different gender role right? Trans people say I don't like this [male/female]box, I want to get into this [female/male]box instead.

Gender critical people say fuck the boxes. Your sex is not your fate. There are two sexes and infinite personalities. There is no need whatsoever to modify your body. You are your body and your body is just fine the way it is. You know what actual gender nonconformity actually is? Being 100% honest about who and what you are and pursuing your interests regardless of whether they are 'masculine' or 'feminine', the haters be damned. Not trying to fool them into thinking you are the opposite sex. That's the cowards solution.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 7 fun1 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 7 fun -  (9 children)

No trans people are against boxes as well

[–]Penultimate_Penance 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Then what exactly are you transitioning into? Why is there any need whatsoever to change your body?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

So why are we supposed to treat men in dresses like women?

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 10 fun1 insightful - 9 fun2 insightful - 10 fun -  (6 children)

You’re not. Trans women are women

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How are they women, without gender?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 10 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Nope. Never have been, never will be.

But for the sake of pedants, why are we supposed to treat people who are observed male at birth like they are women if they say they are/wear clothes deemed women’s clothes

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Coz males, particularly males who claim to be women, want us to think they are the ultimate and only authority on what women are. We don't count to them. Coz they don't see us human beings who exist in our own right who are different and separate to them. They see women only as reflections of their own very male fantasies and desires.

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

Perfectly put.

A woman is nothing to these people but a performance they insist they do best.

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

Women are people with female bodies. Trans women do not have female bodies. Women need a word for themselves. Trans Women aka Men aka people with male bodies have no right whatsoever to define womanhood for us. The only way you can justify considering men who claim to be women women is by claiming womanhood = a certain subset of sex role stereotypes.

Pray tell what does the magical woman essence consist of that means male bodied people can be lumped in with women aka adult human females? If you get rid of gender roles aka sex roles aka sex stereotypes from the debate all you have left is that there are two types of human bodies male and female. Males can never be female full stop.

Black is not white. Transwomen are not women. They're men. You're going to have a hell of a good argument to convince me that men can be women.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

On what basis?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (23 children)

Oh hey little buddy!

Sure thing. Claiming to have a gender identity in the first place is definitely not rooted in misogynistic stereotypes, nor is it narcissistic arrogance to insist that you have some internal understanding of what it is to be/think like the opposite sex. Not at all. 🙄

Eta- sexed features exist. Fact. Trans people alter their features to attempt to resemble the opposite sex all the time. Another fact.

Claiming that despite being a trans person you are against thr concept of gender and don’t reinforce it- false and comical.

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

It isn’t based on stereotypes its based off a sex trait group orientation instinct. Maybe.

It isn't like anything to be the “opposite sex” the term is defined by the experiences of the people existing not some essentialistic conception of “female” thought/experience, quit arguing against someone else’s argument.

I probably reinforce gender less than you do. I mean we know that you believe that there exist “male” and “female” appearances so thats pretty gender normative by itself.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Lmao

You’re saying you identify as the opposite sex/gender based on group orientation that the opposite gender don’t even fit into? And that you would never have even been orientated into, because you weren’t part of the group the instinct applied to?

Women don’t all behave in the same way, we don’t all like or believe or want or do the same things- so what exactly is this group orientation instinct? Asking for examples of what behaviors, habits, and beliefs all women share that TW share as well.

And how do you account for the women and girls who don’t follow that group instinct but know they are women?

Im not talking about mentality or presentation when I say «female » appearance. I’m talking about actual sexed features that trans people often attempt to mimic on their own bodies. Whether you like it or not, sexed features are easily and even unintentionally recognized all the time, and it’s one of the reasons a lot of trans people wish to pass, so idk how you think that’s not gender normative lmao

As far as who reinforces gender more... well I can’t say for sure, but I know one of us (presumably) changed their name and drastically altered their body to appear to be the opposite sex so that despite being a male, they could attempt to live « as a woman », that’s not even getting into the things that person argues in their comments. The other... didn’t, they just grew up to be a woman because they are female and did what they wanted, regardless of whatever group orientation instinct was apparently embedded in them. I’ll leave it up to others to decide which of us is reinforcing gender.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (16 children)

How about you not talk about my appearance and instead stick to criticizing my ideas.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Your appearance is my point. It’s not said to attack you, it’s exactly what I’ve been saying this whole time. You claim to be critical of gender and that what I’m saying is wrong and sexist etc- but your very own transition is exactly my point. You altered your body and your life drastically to appear to be a woman in society, that doesn’t make you gnc, it just means you conformed in the extreme. You changed everything you could about yourself for gender’s sake. You just don’t see it.

You’re ideas are sexist and lack logic, but even what you think you’re saying- the fact of your transition invalidates your arguments and you make yourself the biggest flaw in your matrix theory.

At this point, I’d rather just stick to facts with you than try to dissect your ideas only to have them turn out to reinforce the very things you think you’re fighting against.

[–]adungitit 3 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 7 fun -  (5 children)

the fact of your transition invalidates your arguments

This sounds a lot like "yet you participate in society". People can feel pressured to do things to improve their own quality of life and safety while also being aware of why these things are wrong and trying to raise awareness (i.e. women pressured into wearing makeup for the sake of getting and maintaining a job while advocating against makeup).

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

it’s hypocritical to be trans and attempt to be seen and treated as the opposite sex/gender, say you believe in gender identity, claim that males can move in a spectrum/matrix closer to whatever position females sit on that spectrum through transition, that trans people shouldn’t/don’t have to disclose their sex to potential partners (and that being male is medical history for TW), that all TW and women have some instinctual societal orientation (among other things they’ve said), then come here and act like they are anti gender. Everything this person says on this sub contradicts their claim to not “reify gender norms”. They have not ever said anything about transition being wrong or that they were pressured into anything- so I’m not sure what you’re mentioning that for.

In Heim’s case specifically, yes absolutely the fact of their transition coupled with the views they regularly spout here contradict what they are saying in this post about their views on gender. I’m not talking about trans people as a whole, I’m talking about this person in particular. They tried to call me out about what I said about passing- but they themselves go on to acknowledge that they “pass” and lie on legal documents because it’s safer for them- which... yeah... was my whole point about passing in the first place: that exactly what Heim is doing is the only way that trans people can successfully “change” genders, while explaining why that doesn’t mean they’ve actually changed gender. I didn’t say it was right or good or wrong or bad for trans people to conceal their sex in order to fit into society, all I said was that they do have to do that in order to successfully “change gender”. Heim confirmed that themselves, and then called me sexist for acknowledging what I see in society, as if it’s my rule and not something I observed. I stand by what I said.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (8 children)

My appearance is not a statement to me being a woman its just a way that I feel comfortable looking. I don’t want anyone assuming my gender based off of my appearance because then that means that someone else is probably having that same standard used against them to their detriment. I am a gender abolitionist and the only reason that I put an “F” on my drivers license was so that I could better maneuver in this cis supremacist society of yours. I have zero interest in reifying gender norms so don’t accuse me of such.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 14 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I have zero interest in reifying gender norms

Then why you do and do it to a such extreme? And what about other trans people, organizations and political parties, who are promoting those norms?

"Cis supremacist society" is trying to get away from gender norms and stereotypes since 80s, slowly but surely were going to more and more accepting gender nonconformity, until transgender movement appeared and started claiming that gender nonconforming people are in reality just of the opposite sex or non-binary, that boxes of genders are very rigid, so you need to fit them, and if you don't - you are the opposite sex or non-binary.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

So you reify gender norms in real life but preach against it (sometimes- seems like your matrix thing is constructed to allow transwomen to be women on the matrix but... okay) online.

So fine, you publicly present as woman because it’s safer- sure, does that mean here online we can call you he/him, man, male, that you can acknowledge -online only, of course- that transwomen aren’t women? That gender identity isn’t real? Because if you can’t do those things... then guess what you’re reaffirming? (Hint- gender)

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I probably reinforce gender less than you do.

Your posts, and posting history, give the exact opposite impression, LOL. They are replete with, and reflective of, the sexist sex stereotypes called "gender," in fact. And they make you come off as "typically male" as well as male supremacist.

Your chief aim here seems to be to "reinforce gender" by trying to get everyone else to agree with you that the regressive, sexist, misogynistic sex stereotypes you hold dear are both "instinctual" and universal in all humans (and some other primates too).

Your secondary aim here seems to be to make people think you are an authority on the issues under discussion.

I don't think you're making much progress in achieving either aim.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

This has nothing to do with stereotypes and I never claimed to be an expert.

Also calling me “male” is both bad form, and stereotyping of people who actually identify as males.

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

Why is it "bad form" to name someone's sex. Male isn't something anyone can identify into or out of. It's just a basic fact of life, like female is. Also, male is not confined to "people." Millions of other animals as well as plant species are male or female too.

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

the term is defined by the experiences of the people existing not some essentialistic conception of “female” thought/experience

I can interpret your comment in two ways:

  1. "The experiences of people existing (as a certain sex)", which necessarily excludes trans people, since existing as the opposite sex is not only decidedly not a part of their experience, but is also something that is literally impossible for them to achieve. We can force an artificial hormonal imbalance in male and female people, but that has little to do with a person actually being a certain sex because they, you know, are. The experiences of trans people are the experiences of people obsessed with becoming something they are objectively not to the point of undergoing an unnecessary and invasive procedure on their bodies and spending a lifetime of drugs that are not medically needed, and this is both biologically and experience-wise incomparable with men and women who just happen to exist as a certain sex regardless of how they feel or what they do about it.

  2. Said "experiences" are actually based in gender roles and/or brainsex, so we come back to the usual ladybrains and the patriarchal experiences that the sexes are subjected to being treated as more important and real than the neutral reality of sex itself. Instead of the goal being to end the corrupt system saddling the sexes with these ideas of what they should be doing and how they should be acting, the goal instead seems to be to use the corrupt system to define the sexes themselves and turn it all into one big game of roleplaying, with the liberal "I chose it!" disclaimers being used to soothe everyone's conscience when they take issue with the inherent unfairness of the system.