QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist?

submitted by Penultimate_Penance from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (28 children)

The problem is that doctors failed to ask for his birth sex, not him presenting as a man. Also, I don't trust sources that purposefully misgender trans people. Many trans people are fighting for better health care and we need to join the fight by listening to trans men.

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

The problem is that professionals who should know better caved to the trans lobby and started using gender identity rather than sex in medical records. Also, Whitley was so happy with all this "validation" that Whitley didn't think of challenging the doctors' misperceptions. But that is beside th point. If it were true that you can change everything but height through "transition", then why would "birth" sex matter at all in trans identified patients' health care?

I don't trust sources that purposefully misgender trans people.

Just in case you think this story is made up, they list this BBC article as their source.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 3 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 7 fun -  (14 children)

I'm not saying the story is made up. I'm saying GC sites like womenarehuman.com have no business pretending to advocate for trans men. Trans men have said over and over again they do not want gender critical activism.

Take a look at r/FTM. There are 20+ threads complaining about "TERFs". There are also many articles on other sites written by trans men complaining about "TERFs" and mind you GCs consider TERF a slur. So that means they don't want your activism. In contrast I found only ONE thread on r/FTM complaining about trans women, yet GCs keep saying trans women talk over trans men. This is obviously a GC concern more than trans men's concern.

To be an ally to a group, you have to listen to actual members of that group, not impose your own ideas. Imagine a white self-proclaimed ally saying "well, that interaction wasn't really racist" when multiple POC say otherwise? Besides the blatant misgendering, trans men are a marginalized community and its rude and gross to speak over people who made it clear they don't want you to speak for them.

Trans men are fighting for better healthcare. Just yesterday there was a thread on r/FTM titled I hate when I feel like there’s something wrong with my reproductive stuff and I try to see what the problem is and how to fix it but everything is labeled as “WOMEN” “GIRL” and “FEMALE.”. I know this is contradictory to what GCs want, as they call for eliminating the terms women and girls for health issues traditionally considered "female" But GCs and trans men have opposite agendas, which is why GCs should never speak for trans men and trans men should never speak for GC. GCs do their activism. Trans men and their allies do their activism.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

Take a look at r/FTM

Reddit has a reliability factor somewhere between bending the truth and untreated schizophrenia. Surely there are better sources.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

Here are articles by trans men from other sites.

J.K. Rowling and the Echo Chamber of TERFs - Slate

Trabnsphobes And Trans Men - Jay Hulme

Why are trans men always left out of the conversation? - Huck Magazine

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

Why are trans men always left out of the conversation? - Huck Magazine

That article is funny. Author is showing all the examples how male privilege works, how males have much more platform, then saying that when author started passing as a man - received so much privileges and got a platform. And then surprised why transwomen, especially not passing ones, are gaining so much traction, getting platform and are focused, while transmen are forgotten even by trans community and their voices are silent. First half of article it explained really well - because they are seen as female and transwomen still seen as male, that's why. And that's why everything is changed when they starting to "pass very well". And instead of recognizing this sexism from males and patriarchy, author is blaming feminists and women on this instead. Similar to how transwomen are blaming feminists and women on them being murdered and not blaming conservative men who are murdering them.

Reminded me book "Why women are blamed for everything". Such a typical situation from there.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Look at what he wrote:

But when trans women start living their lives in full view of the public, they go from the top of the totem pole to the very bottom. Not only are they being mistreated for being trans, they encounter the misogynistic abuse that cis women have dealt with their entire lives. To then be attacked by other women who claim to be feminists – as they have been in the media and real life for some time – must be soul destroying.

Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs) are one of the best groups at pretending trans men don’t exist, lest it shatters their delusion that all trans people just want access to women-only spaces so we can attack them.

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

Much better.

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

Trans men have said over and over again they do not want gender critical activism

Conservative women say the same thing.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

In that case I would not use a conservative woman as an example for an article on voting rights or abortion rights.

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

How are GC suppused to get our point across if we are not allowed to talk about trans people?! (I assume you don't like we speak for "trans women" and people with other "gender identities", either, right?) You've said yourself: we have opposite goals, that is why we need to talk. Why are transactivists the only ones allowed to talk about women's rights?

Moreover, I also care about science and public health. That is why I talk (and share articles) about how transgenderism affects these areas.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

You can talk about trans people, but that site is using an example of a specific person who most likely does not want his case to be used as an example by transphobes, and has the same opinion on "TERFs" as r/gendercynical. At the very least they could have been respectful by using he and Mr.

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

That sounds a lot like we can't talk about trans people or if we do it should be in TRA's terms. So, again, how are we supposed to get our point across? And why are transactivists allowed to use terms we disapprove of?

[–]strictly 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

that site is using an example of a specific person who most likely does not want his case to be used as an example by transphobes

J.K. Rowling is an example of specific person who most likely does not want her case to be used as an example by those who call her TERF but trans activists use her as an example of "bigot" anyway. People will be used as examples by the opposing side, that's just how it is.

Besides the blatant misgendering

To misgender the speaker needs to claim a person has a gender identity the person doesn't have, which requires the speaker to use gender identity based definitions for the words involved in the supposed misgendering. This makes it very unlikely that any misgendering happened as would require the speaker to be a genderist, aka not gender critical.

To be an ally to a group, you have to listen to actual members of that group, not impose your own ideas.

You call us bad allies but I don't get why you consider us allies to the current trans activism in the first place. We are on the opposing side so you shouldn't really expect us to act like allies. It would be like me complaining about trans activists being bad allies to GC for not actually listening to us instead of imposing their own ideas, it wouldn't make sense for me to expect trans activists to act like allies. I believe female people, even those who identify as men, should have the same female rights as all other females, but that doesn't make me an ally to current trans activism. It's like how I believe all female people, even the conservative ones against abortion, should have the same right to get abortions should they choose to, and that doesn't make me an anti-abortion ally either.

At the very least they could have been respectful by using he and Mr.

There is no moral duty to lie about trans people just because they like being lied about.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

J.K. Rowling is an example of specific person who most likely does not want her case to be used as an example by those who call her TERF but trans activists use her as an example of "bigot" anyway. People will be used as examples by the opposing side, that's just how it is.

J.K. Rowling is a public figure, just like Caitlyn Jenner and Elliot Page. Plus, she chose to make her statements public.

To misgender the speaker needs to claim a person has a gender identity the person doesn't have, which requires the speaker to use gender identity based definitions for the words involved in the supposed misgendering. This makes it very unlikely that any misgendering happened as would require the speaker to be a genderist, aka not gender critical.

You don't have to be a "genderist" to misgender someone.

There is no moral duty to lie about trans people just because they like being lied about.

It's polite and the right thing to do.

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

she chose to make her statements public

Then you should have no problems with people having opinions about people who made public statements which this female trans person did.

You don't have to be a "genderist" to misgender someone.

You can't lie about someone having a false gender identity unless you first refer to a gender identity which requires the speaker to use gender identity based definitions for the words involved in supposed misgendering. You have to prove that the source consider "she" a pronoun to be used for those with a specific gender identity. It's very unlikely that they would be referring to any type of gender identity with pronouns as they are not genderists thus they can't misgender anyone with pronouns, only missex if they referred to sex.

It's polite and the right thing to do.

Lying goes against my moral principals and I don't care if people who ask me to lie about them consider me impolite for refusing to lie, it wasn't polite of them to expect me to lie in the first place. I am not going to adopt gender-identity based definitions either as that would lead to misgendering people en masse with false gender identities just to benefit a few, it goes against moral conscience. Innocent people shouldn't have suffer being labeled with false gender identities just because some people don't like being their sex.

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

she chose to make her statements public.

Yet she isn't remotely the only person to be labeled a "TERF" for making public statements. Labeling, threatening, and silencing have been routine TRA tactics against any publicly expressed dissent.

Is JKR a permissible target because she's a public figure? If so, what's the TRA rationale for attacking all public expressions of dissent, regardless of the popularity of the dissenter?

"Making her statement public" here is equivalent to "speaking her opinion." If some statements can be expressed while others are extrajudicially punished, the punishment is enacted based on the statement, not the popularity of the person making the statement.

This isn't the targeting of a public figure; it's the suppression of speech in general.

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

The problem is that doctors failed to ask for his birth sex, not him presenting as a man.

See, this I disagree with 1000%. Many people have medically-relevant physical conditions or have engaged in medically-relevant behaviors that are not apparent on sight but which we are obliged to inform HCPs of when we seek care coz these conditions & behaviors might well affect diagnosis and treatment.

IMHO, it's arrogant and preposterous for people like this "trans man" to expect that HCFs and the intake nurses who work in ERs & other HCFs should suddenly adopt new entirely standards and protocols to placate a population that only recently has emerged and which has done nothing to persuade the medical profession or wider public of why we have to adopt new ways.

This is not how women in the 1970s got the term "Ms." widely accepted as substitute for "Miss" and "Mrs."

Also, if this "trans man" were asked to state her sex, who's to say that she would have responded honestly?

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (4 children)

IMHO, it's arrogant and preposterous for people like this "trans man" to expect that HCFs and the intake nurses who work in ERs & other HCFs should suddenly adopt new entirely standards and protocols to placate a population that only recently has emerged and which has done nothing to persuade the medical profession or wider public of why we have to adopt new ways.

Here are a list trans people from the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. Eleanor Rykener, Alan L. Hart, Lucy Hicks Anderson, Amelio Robles Ávila, Sir Lady Java, Willmer ‘Little Ax” Broadnax, Chevalier d’Eon, Harry Allen, Michael Dillon and Charley Parkhurst. Trans people have not "recently emerged". We are persuading the wider public. You just disagree on how to go about it.

Also, if this "trans man" were asked to state her sex, who's to say that she would have responded honestly?

It's he and yes trans people do tell doctors their birth sex.

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's he and yes trans people do tell doctors their birth sex.

Except in the particular case we are discussing the person didn't reveal this information.

Also, FYI in health care the front line people doing the crucial gatekeeping are usually never doctors. People with hidden health conditions and medically relevant behaviors have a duty to reveal their/our situations to people doing the intake. Whether those people be the EMS workers who respond to a 911 or 999 call, the triage nurse in an ER/AE, the administrator who takes your details, or the other parties on the line in a virtual medical consult.

That list of "trans people" from prior centuries isn't the convincing proof you think it is.

[–]worried19 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's also horrible and arrogant to retroactively decide that people from centuries ago were transgender when the concept did not exist for them.

If I lived 150 years ago, I'd disguise myself as a man. And then TRAs from the 21st century would go around telling everyone I actually had a male gender soul instead of merely being a gender nonconforming woman trying to survive in a hostile environment. While erasing all the accomplishments that I made as a female in the meantime. They've done it to women like Jennie Hodgers and James Barry. For a movement that's supposedly all about respecting people's identities, they sure don't put mind putting words in the mouths of dead people. This is like the Mormons posthumously baptizing Anne Frank. It's fucking offensive as hell.

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

It is insane how they are ignoring all the sexism and patriarchy and saying "it was a choice". And they never wondering - why all the "trans" of the past are transmen, and that "third genders" in other cultures are always gay or infertile men. They ignore that woman was not allowed by law to work in science or be surgeon or live open public life, so of course some women would pretend to be a man, but not because "they feel as men", no - because they want to be a human being with full rights. I pretended to be a man to get a job in engineering/IT, because when I was sending resume with female name, I was instantly dismissed, few times I was laughed out, yet when I started presenting with male name - I was called to personal meetings by HR almost always. Am I transman now too? It is stupid.

And TRA with LibFems are like that everywhere. They for some reason think that women around the world and women 200 years ago had same rights and freedoms as white privileged women in 1st world country today. Especially it is seen how they are defending hijab and burqa. Saying "it is a choice", when in majority of islamic word burqa or hijab are required by the law and in places where it is not required by the law - family have a right to disown a girl or a woman if she refuses to wear burqa or hijab, in Iran men are throwing acid in face of women who not wearing hijab. Women in thouse countries are spicifically going outside without hijab or burqa as form of a protest to get human rights. Yet on West it is called "it is a choice".

And then those same people are saying that "it is libfems who fought for all the achievements have" and saying that 2nd wave, suffragettes and so on were "libfems" too, while those women held almost opposite beliefs to libfems and were calling oppression sex based and were saying that oppression is based on sex class, and not put on individual women, when libfems are focusing on individualism and choice.

It is complete lack of understanding. Even in this sub GB does this all the time, she is posting "examples" that are completely disproving her position, but she thinks those people "made a choice" and supporting her narrative, she completely misses the point and can't see the oppression and sexism pushing women to do what they did.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

It is insane how they are ignoring all the sexism and patriarchy and saying "it was a choice". And they never wondering - why all the "trans" of the past are transmen, and that "third genders" in other cultures are always gay or infertile men.

Eleanor Rykener, Lucy Hicks Anderson, Sir Lady Java, Chevalier d’Eon, Marja-Sisko Aalto, Rebecca Allison, Robina Asti and Sister Mary Elizabeth Clark are all trans women.

They ignore that woman was not allowed by law to work in science or be surgeon or live open public life, so of course some women would pretend to be a man, but not because "they feel as men", no - because they want to be a human being with full rights.

I am fully aware that women were barred from many professions in the past. Heck, women are still de facto barred from certain professions, like sanitation, mechanics, IT, especially WOC. However, some people will still be trans, even if we had equal rights and sexism doesn't exist.

I pretended to be a man to get a job in engineering/IT, because when I was sending resume with female name, I was instantly dismissed, few times I was laughed out, yet when I started presenting with male name - I was called to personal meetings by HR almost always. Am I transman now too? It is stupid.

I am sorry that happened to you and no you are not a trans man. This should not be happening.

And then those same people are saying that "it is libfems who fought for all the achievements have"

All feminists fought for equal rights for women.

2nd wave, suffragettes and so on were "libfems" too, while those women held almost opposite beliefs to libfems and were calling oppression sex based and were saying that oppression is based on sex class

There were libfems and radfems back then. You can't generalize every feminist from that time.

when libfems are focusing on individualism and choice.

Liberal feminism focuses on achieving gender equality through political and legal reform. For instance, if black and indigenous students receive more school suspensions than white students for similar offenses, we would push for a law requiring public schools to collect suspension data by race and actively address those disparities, while also requiring schools to consider other options before suspension. If women are getting sexually harassed at work, we push for laws requiring employers to take sexual harassment seriously. Radical feminism calls for a radical reordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation. Radical feminism aims to dismantle patriarchy rather than making adjustments to the system through legal changes.

[–]strictly 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I don't trust sources that purposefully misgender trans people.

Misgendering requires using gender definitions as one cannot misgender someone without first referring to gender identity. Do you have quote proving that this source states that they consider male and female gender identities? Because if they refer to sex they can by definition not misgender, only mis-sex, and calling female people female is correctly-sexing, not mis-sexing. But even if this source had mis-sexed this female person as "male" then I don't think this person would have minded it as many trans people have being mis-sexed as a goal for them.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (4 children)

Misgendering is using terms and pronouns that person said they do not prefer. Was it so hard for them to type he, him, his, and Mr.?

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

Missexing someone is confusing and inaccurate. I don't trust sources that call men "she" and women "he". It would be a lot harder to destroy women's sports and spaces if media sources accurately sexed people in their articles. He broke all of the women sports records. He was transferred to a women's prison and shortly assaulted prisoners. He is demanding access to women's locker rooms. Accurately sexing people put's these issues in a much clearer light.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Missexing someone is confusing and inaccurate. I don't trust sources that call men "she" and women "he".

I don't either, which is why I don't trust womenarehuman.com.

It would be a lot harder to destroy women's sports and spaces if media sources accurately sexed people in their articles.

But in this case we're using he for someone born female, and according to GCs men's spaces don't need protection.

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

Misgendering is using terms and pronouns that person said they do not prefer.

Misgendering, as the name indicates, is lying about someone having a gender identity they don't have. Calling someone a pronoun they don't prefer is not proof of misgendering as you need evidence the person indeed referred to a false gender identity, and a prerequirement for that is that speaker uses a gender identity based system for their pronoun usage as otherwise they wouldn’t be able to refer to a false gender identity in the first place. The most likely perpetrator of misgendering is thus a trans activist, as they have the required belief system to perform misgendering (and trans activists happen to be quite keen on misgendering non-trans people with false gender identities).

If you refer to something else than lying about gender identities with misgendering then you are using the wrong word for it and should use a more accurate word representing the phenomena you have in mind.

Was it so hard for them to type he, him, his, and Mr.?

I don't use a gender identity based system for pronouns so it would be lying of me to call a known female "he". Lying isn't hard but it's against my morals. I don't use a gender identity based system as that almost inevitably leads to misgendering people en masse and I happen to have strong negative feelings against misgendering (a lie about the mind) as that would be much more personal than any accidental mis-sexing, no one should ever have to be labeled with a false gender identity.

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

"Misgendering" is a false concept.