All: How have your beliefs evolved?

submitted by [deleted] from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]worried19 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

Why do you think other trans women like peaking and Fleurista can find common ground with us, but you feel like the situation is hopeless?

It's a tough situation. I really don't think most GC women are bigots, although I will admit I have seen negative attitudes towards trans women, much more common on Ovarit than here. I think some of us get so frustrated with the situation that anger is being taken out on trans people in unproductive ways.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (25 children)

Peaking passes. I don’t know about Fleurista but I would assume the same. The difference in the life of a stealth trans woman and one who can’t pass is a big gap. The need for protections is a lot clearer to people in my position I suppose.

Even leaving aside the constant insults I get, with assertions I have x y z mental disorder and am a raging misigynist worse than “other men”, There’s no common ground that can be found when so many of you are arguing for transition to be inaccessible and pushing policies that would basically remove people like me from society. Surely that’s understandable.

[–]worried19 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (24 children)

Fair point. Fleurista has a YouTube channel by the way, in case you wanted to check her out.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXJtylj7hCourJmYC1eFE1g/videos

The difference in the life of a stealth trans woman and one who can’t pass is a big gap. The need for protections is a lot clearer to people in my position I suppose.

But don't you think passing trans women are in favor of protections? Clearly, they would need a protected space in many cases, too. And GC isn't against protected spaces. I know you and I have talked about that before, and you're in favor of dedicated gender-neutral restrooms and locker rooms for people who either don't pass or don't feel comfortable with others of their natal sex.

Even leaving aside the constant insults I get, with assertions I have x y z mental disorder and am a raging misigynist worse than “other men”

I don't think anyone should be insulting you. You've always been very polite. I've never seen you be rude to someone in an interaction. You do have a very negative attitude towards men, but I'm not sure how that means you're a "raging misogynist." Anyway, I haven't seen that from you. Someone actually said you were worse than other natal males?

There’s no common ground that can be found when so many of you are arguing for transition to be inaccessible and pushing policies that would basically remove people like me from society. Surely that’s understandable.

No one wants you removed from society, though. What GC beliefs would prevent you from getting a job, buying a house, voting, marrying, raising kids, etc.? You should be able to live your life just like any other citizen. If we don't believe that you've literally changed sexes (which I don't think you believe either?) it shouldn't affect your ability to go about your daily life like any other person, male or female.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

I assume they aren’t against them but they need them less and see the need for them less so surely they are at least less stridently for them.

And GC isn't against protected spaces.

But also not doing anything for them. Since they don’t exist and trans people can’t make them it’s at best a hypothetical solution or at worst a smokescreen depending on the one speaking. Without concentrated action from non trans people such spaces won’t happen. I do believe dedicated single occupancy neutral spaces is the best solution but only action by non trans people can make that happen.

The “worse than other males” has been directed at all trans women not me specifically but I’ve seen a couple of people say such here.

Removal from society is the outgrowth or what you are espousing. Take bathrooms, without access to safe facilities we lose the ability to participate in many facets of public lfe. The net effect of banning us from women’s facilities and not building new ones is essentially a ban from us participating in large sections of public life.

Or the fact that many of you object to dedicated trans protections ( instead saying it should just be for gnc people broadly) which would leave a gap to be exploited by those seeking to discriminate against us.

Categorization of transition as cosmetic as I have seen pushed for not only renders passing an impossibility but essentially deprives all but extremely wealthy trans people necessary medical care for their mental well being.

Whether or not you purposefully and specifically wish harm to us doesn’t preclude harm from the outgrowth of the policies gc sometimes pushes.

Not to mention we can be denied housing for being trans, voter id laws combined with trans people being unable to update id as many of you push for makes that uniquely dangerous and embarrassing, marrying is made far less likely without timely and affordable transition, It’s been directly argued on the old Reddit board that we should be banned from adopting as mentally unfit and combined with transition induced infertility would make raising children. Impossible for many of us. Your (gc not necessarily specially you) policies left to course at least complicates our ability to do those things.

[–]worried19 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

But also not doing anything for them.

Well, I suppose they just feel it's not their fight. Few people in society are actual activists, and radical feminists focus their time and energy and money on issues that affect natal women. But I'm sure most GC people would vote in favor of a law mandating protected spaces that don't conflict with what they see as sex-based protections.

Since they don’t exist and trans people can’t make them it’s at best a hypothetical solution

Trans people could actually make them happen. They have a huge political lobby at the moment. If the LGBT community threw their collective weight towards things like protected prison wings and gender-neutral restrooms, they could absolutely create laws that would mandate them. The LGB has power they can use to help the T. And plenty of non-trans people would vote in favor.

The “worse than other males” has been directed at all trans women not me specifically but I’ve seen a couple of people say such here.

I wonder what their reasoning is. Some natal males are terrible, no doubt, but I don't see how any trans woman could be worse than others. There are plenty of male-identifying men who are straight out of a horror movie, killers, rapists, and God knows what else.

Removal from society is the outgrowth or what you are espousing. Take bathrooms, without access to safe facilities we lose the ability to participate in many facets of public lfe. The net effect of banning us from women’s facilities and not building new ones is essentially a ban from us participating in large sections of public life.

But passing transsexual women have always had access to female bathrooms. There's no lock on the door. As you say, if you're not passing and not comfortable using either men's or women's restrooms, then how does this affect you? Despite self-ID laws, you're still in the same boat. Unless we have dedicated third spaces, then someone on one side or the other is going to be uncomfortable.

Or the fact that many of you object to dedicated trans protections ( instead saying it should just be for gnc people broadly) which would leave a gap to be exploited by those seeking to discriminate against us.

I say just make a blanket protection for "gender presentation." That protects you and it protects me.

Not to mention we can be denied housing for being trans, voter id laws combined with trans people being unable to update id as many of you push for makes that uniquely dangerous and embarrassing, marrying is made far less likely without timely and affordable transition, It’s been directly argued on the old Reddit board that we should be banned from adopting as mentally unfit and combined with transition induced infertility would make raising children. Impossible for many of us. Your (gc not necessarily specially you) policies left to course at least complicates our ability to do those things.

I would strongly oppose any GC person who tried to stop people from adopting based on trans status. Having the right to found a family is extremely important for all people. That's why I get so distressed when I hear about doctors destroying children's fertility. Even if they do grow up to identify as trans, they deserve to have the choice to have biological kids if they want them. Marriage laws already protect both same and opposite sex couples. And of course housing discrimination and voting discrimination should not exist.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Well, I suppose they just feel it's not their fight.

It’s an action/inaction thing I suppose. Consider the trolly problem. Trans women are the ones on the second track, the act of banning us from those spaces is pulling the lever so the trolly hits us. Encouraging the ban without an adequate safeguard is an action doing us harm; whether you think that makes it blameworthy is a whole ethical debate.

Trans people could actually make them happen. They have a huge political lobby at the moment. If the LGBT community threw their collective weight towards things like protected prison wings and gender-neutral restrooms, they could absolutely create laws that would mandate them. The LGB has power they can use to help the T. And plenty of non-trans people would vote in favor.

Lgb people could maybe. Trans people can’t. You all really underestimate our level or influence. Look at employment protections, basically universally pushed for and advocated for by trans people for decades and it still only happened judicially rather than something more secure in a statute. Let alone getting something that would cost so much money as a mandated facility change.

I wonder what their reasoning is. Some natal males are terrible, no doubt, but I don't see how any trans woman could be worse than others. There are plenty of male-identifying men who are straight out of a horror movie, killers, rapists, and God knows what else.

I honestly just think some here simply hate trans women. It’s not a logical thing necessarily.

But passing transsexual women have always had access to female bathrooms. There's no lock on the door. As you say, if you're not passing and not comfortable using either men's or women's restrooms, then how does this affect you? Despite self-ID laws, you're still in the same boat. Unless we have dedicated third spaces, then someone on one side or the other is going to be uncomfortable.

I use women’s rooms if no neutral facilities are available which is usually the case. A ban would force me to only go places that have a neutral restroom which are rare in this part of the country.

I say just make a blanket protection for "gender presentation." That protects you and it protects me.

Because it doesn’t protect me. All they need say is they are acting in that fashion not because I am dressed but because I am trans. If they claim that they wouldn’t ban a cis man who looked and dressed like me they could argue it isn’t about presentation but an unprotected belief or even unprotected mental condition (gender dysphoria being excluded specifically from the ADA)

I would strongly oppose any GC person who tried to stop people from adopting based on trans status.

Fair enough but some gc people would disagree with you there.

And of course housing discrimination and voting discrimination should not exist.

But they do and trans people aren’t protected. Part of what if changes do is help prevent those for the lucky that pass. And We still don’t have legal protections for them.

[–]worried19 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I don't even think trans women should be "banned" from bathrooms. It would be a hard if not impossible thing to enforce, for starters. But there needs to be some safeguarding.

Trans people have gained enormous political power. If their lobby can pass laws allowing natal males in female prisons and female sports, they could damn sure bring about gender-neutral restrooms or protected prison wings. The White House even changed Title IX to respect gender identity instead of biological sex. If that's not power, I don't know what is.

I honestly just think some here simply hate trans women. It’s not a logical thing necessarily.

I won't ask you to name names, but I sincerely hope that's not the case. And just so you know, I'm worried for you. I know you mentioned you only participate here when you're not doing well mentally. I feel like you express a lot of self-hatred towards yourself as a non-passing trans woman. But many if not most trans women are in that same boat. Your life can still have value and meaning even if you don't look like how society expects.

I use women’s rooms if no neutral facilities are available which is usually the case. A ban would force me to only go places that have a neutral restroom which are rare in this part of the country.

They should be more common, but regardless, I really don't think bans are coming any time soon. GC really has bigger fish to fry at this point. I know you're afraid of men and don't want to be in with them. That's understandable if you've faced violence in the past. I don't want to force you into a men's room either.

All they need say is they are acting in that fashion not because I am dressed but because I am trans.

I disagree, though. What would be their rationale? What they really have a problem with is non-conforming appearance, not how you perceive yourself in your own head. A heterosexual transvestite like theory or a GNC woman like me would not be any more protected against people who dislike how we present ourselves.

But they do and trans people aren’t protected. Part of what if changes do is help prevent those for the lucky that pass. And We still don’t have legal protections for them.

As far as I know, gay people also don't have federal legal protections for sexual orientation either in terms of housing and employment discrimination. They got same-sex marriages, but the other stuff got left behind. It seems to me this would be a fruitful endeavor and a higher priority than some of the things they're currently doing. As far as voting, though, trans people can vote. And the vast majority of radical feminists are not in favor of voter ID.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Trans people have gained enormous political power. If their lobby can pass laws allowing natal males in female prisons and female sports, they could damn sure bring about gender-neutral restrooms or protected prison wings.

Neither of those cost money and are far from universal. For instance if I were arrested today, despite being post op I would be put in men’s Jail and eventually men’s prison in this state.

Your life can still have value and meaning even if you don't look like how society expects.

Thank you. I’m not suicidal, I also don’t think my life has value or meaning but I’m not planning on ending it.

I disagree, though. What would be their rationale?

Because it’s pretense. It doesn’t matter if that’s really the case or not. It’s the same thing as “sincere religious belief” justifying gay discrimination over protections for gay people. If you leave a loophole, bigots will use it.

As far as I know, gay people also don't have federal legal protections for sexual orientation either in terms of housing and employment discrimination.

They don’t but should.

[–]worried19 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Neither of those cost money and are far from universal.

Yeah, but it shows their ability to get things done. It could happen, if they put the same effort into those things as they do with their current endeavors. And I certainly don't believe trans women should be in the general male prison population. They obviously need a protected space. But throwing them in with natal women isn't the answer. You may not be a danger, but there are some very serious criminals who are.

Thank you. I’m not suicidal, I also don’t think my life has value or meaning but I’m not planning on ending it.

Do you think there's anything at all that could change your mindset? I've struggled with despair at times as well. Maybe not as seriously as you have, I don't know, but I feel like there's got to be a way for you to see the value in yourself. A lot of people find that through relationships and friendships. Or even religion or spirituality can help some people.

I'm visibly GNC too, and I understand it's not the same for me as a natal woman, but I know what it feels like to get stared at or called slurs. I just think people who have a problem with me, it's their problem, not mine. If they're bigoted because of the way I look, it doesn't affect my value. If anything, it's their reputation that takes a hit. It shows how petty or nasty or brainwashed they are.

If you leave a loophole, bigots will use it.

I guess I just don't see it. The people who are upset by gender nonconformity usually base that on religion. Those bigots are not going to be any friendlier towards people like me or theory than they are towards you. If they wouldn't have a reason to fire us, they wouldn't have a reason to fire you. If they can't base it on gender presentation, then they have no legitimate reason. It's wrongful termination.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah, but it shows their ability to get things done. It could happen, if they put the same effort into those things as they do with their current endeavors. And I certainly don't believe trans women should be in the general male prison population. They obviously need a protected space. But throwing them in with natal women isn't the answer. You may not be a danger, but there are some very serious criminals who are.

Like I said, dedicated facilities are probably the best answer for prisons but it’s another case of getting someone to spend money for the benefit of trans people. That’s a hard sell. But whatever happens you can’t put a trans woman in a men’s prison. It’s asking for inhuman levels of abuse.

Do you think there's anything at all that could change your mindset? I've struggled with despair at times as well. Maybe not as seriously as you have, I don't know, but I feel like there's got to be a way for you to see the value in yourself. A lot of people find that through relationships and friendships. Or even religion or spirituality can help some people.

Not particularly. I chose a bad life path and had to transition so I don’t really do anything meaningful and don’t really have important connections to people. That’s unlikely to change. It’s not the end of the world but I am insignificant, I’m just working to accept that.

Those bigots are not going to be any friendlier towards people like me or theory than they are towards you.

It doesn’t really matter whether that are or not, you wouldn’t have that “for being trans not for being “ loophole. I’m not saying you wouldn’t be hated in saying there would be a legal loophole to bypass the protections that worked against us but not you. It’s not wrongful if it isn’t illegal. Your proposal protects presentation but not being trans itself so simply by citing the trans status rather than presentation, it is defensible yo fire us for it if being trans isn’t explicitly protected. Do you see the distinction?

[–]MarkTwainiac 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

As far as I know, gay people also don't have federal legal protections for sexual orientation either in terms of housing and employment discrimination. They got same-sex marriages, but the other stuff got left behind. It seems to me this would be a fruitful endeavor and a higher priority than some of the things they're currently doing.

Some history on what happened with the US federal law known as ENDA: https://www.salon.com/2007/10/08/lgbt/

the vast majority of radical feminists are not in favor of voter ID.

Really? This is news to me. I now live in a state where voters have to show ID & don't know anyone of any political persuasion against the practice. I used to live in state where there was no voter ID, & the polling places were run by people & procedures so lackadaisical there was lots of room for fraud. Can you provide some evidence that "the vast majority of radical feminists" are against voter ID, please?

I understand that many might be against specific laws & movements that use voter ID as a ploy & cover for the real aim disenfranchising certain groups. I am against that too. But that's very different to being against voter ID altogether.

I've long supported organizations & efforts whose aim is to help citizens & residents of the US without IDs obtain them so that citizens can exercise their right to vote; citizens (& residents where applicable) can access important services like Medicare, SS, public education & other state, federal & local benefits; & so citizens & residents, even ones in the US illegally, can have full freedom of movement that includes operating a motor vehicle & flying on a commercial airplane.

Using today's technology & means of outreach that are not just possible but practical, there's no reason for anyone in the US who wants a government-approved ID to be without one. The entire set-up for taking ID photos, printing IDs & laminating them could fit in a briefcase.

There's no reason nowadays to make poor people travel to DMVs when it's easy to go where people who need IDs live & issue them IDs on their doorsteps, or at the local PO, school, grocery store, gas station, senior center, etc. (I've been advocating that booths for issuing IDs be set up wherever people to go to get COVID vaccines, in fact.)Similarly, it's not hard to train outreach workers how to help people without certified copies of their birth certificates or SS cards to obtain them.

https://www.voteriders.org/

https://www.spreadthevote.org/

https://www.demos.org/research/got-id-helping-americans-get-voter-identification

I think supporting such efforts is a better use of my time, money & energy than pretending that in 2021 it's wholly unreasonable to expect people to have photo IDs. I'm surprised to find that some would say this means I'm not a feminist.

Also, I've noticed that many of the same people who vociferously oppose the practice of having to present an ID in order to vote in the US are also advocating for US citizens & residents to be forced to provide proof of COVID-19 vaccination in order to go out for a meal, attend school, enter a grocery store, go to Walmart or attend a sporting event, concert or showing of a film in a theater. Seems oddly inconsistent & more than a tad hypocritical to me. (BTW, for various reasons, I am against having to provide proof of vaccine to access most public places within the US, but have no problem with such being required for international travel. If COVID-19 were a predominantly pediatric disease affecting & putting the lives of children at risk like polio, MMR & mumps, or a teenage/young adult disease like bacterial meningitis, I'd have a different view about schools.)

[–]worried19 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for the background on ENDA.

Fair enough, there's been so much Democratic handwringing over voter ID that I figured most leftists were against it because of charges that it disenfranchises poor people of color. I shouldn't assume that's the same view of all radical feminists.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Ironically, I would probably just keep using passing privilege without a care if it weren't for gender critical and radical feminist beliefs leading me to believe that it's wrong to occupy female spaces like that. Maybe GC can help passing transwomen be better advocates for actual trans rights, or at least more active, as strange as that may sound!

Do you still see yourself as transmedicalist? I enjoyed interacting with transmed and truscum communities until it became clear that many if not most of the people I was speaking with believed that transition is the cure to gender dysphoria and therefore no research into preventative medicine or therapies or anything that did not require lifelong medical treatment and social adjustments is necessary. That seems like a key difference between QT/trans and GC beliefs is that GC believes transition is mostly harmful and something to work towards doing away with. That's really tricky, because that is really the most established form of treatment that's available currently and it doesn't seem ethical to just ban exogenous hormones or surgeries without a comparable alternative in their place.

It's rough since we're trying to just have normal lives, but we're enabling a deeply problematic system by transitioning as GC people view it and I would have to agree. There are certainly GC people who aren't very understanding and extend no sympathy for trans people or anyone experiencing gender dysphoria, and that doesn't seem very progressive whatsoever. On the other hand, I can see where we are so wrapped up in our own troubles that we develop tunnel vision and can't see a larger problem.

If you don't mind my asking, how do you think trans women who might not pass, like Miranda Yardley, are able to see things from a gender critical perspective? Or get on with the GC crowd?

[–]adungitit 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That's really tricky, because that is really the most established form of treatment that's available currently and it doesn't seem ethical to just ban exogenous hormones or surgeries without a comparable alternative in their place.

It used to be hard for me to judge people who want to "pass" for doing so when we live in a crappy sexist society that does judge you a lot based on your sex (leading also to laws that further have to enforce gendered spaces so women could have a semblance of a normal life in public). On the other hand, I also hate the idea that people are born in the wrong body and need plastic surgeries if these unfair norms cause them anxiety. It's one of those things that I "understood" as much as I understood gender-conforming women as long as they understood that what they're doing is counter-productive to feminist goals.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you still see yourself as transmedicalist?

Yes.

That's really tricky, because that is really the most established form of treatment that's available currently and it doesn't seem ethical to just ban exogenous hormones or surgeries without a comparable alternative in their place.

To me transition is an acceptable if unfortunate outcome. I don’t want anyone to transition who doesn’t need to but transition isn’t harmful to those who need it. I suppose to be being a natal woman would be better but I just can’t see “becoming a cis man” as a successful outcome. Turning a trans woman into a cis man seems like a loss to me. But I also want enough safeguards that only those who need to are transitioning. Having a cis man transition wrongly also feels like a loss. I don’t honestly know how I feel about trans men. Wanting to be masculine or wanting to be a man is so wildly foreign to me I just try not to judge them and be supportive.

If you don't mind my asking, how do you think trans women who might not pass, like Miranda Yardley, are able to see things from a gender critical perspective? Or get on with the GC crowd?

Honestly I assume you either deep self hatred or some kind of pathological need to please. I really try not to ascribe that to people but I can’t fathom another reason someone could campaign against their own interests and ability to live.

[–]BiologyIsReal 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

But also not doing anything for them.

Why should GC do anything about? It's trans identified males who don't want to share spaces with men, you're the ones who should be advocating for third spaces. And don't give me the ridiculous excuse that no one cares about what trans identified people wants. The trans lobby has been changing laws and policies behind everyone's back to make self-ID a thing. In some countries, "gender identity" is already enshrined in law. There is a middle aged man that will be competing against women in a Olympics's weightlifting event, and he is far from being the only male competing in the female categories of several sports. You have a good bunc of the Media supporting your causes and using prefered prounouns and other "inclusive language". Even news sources who publish articles against transgenderism often use "prefered pronouns". To say nothing of the support from Big Tech companies like Google, Reddit, Twitter, etcetera. Many scientis and health care professionals are bending backwards to entertain absurd ideas like sex is a spectrum or that you can change sex. But you can't have third spaces? Give me a break!

If you have a problem with the status quo, you should complain with the trans activists who are doing nothing to make trans spaces a possibility. Of course, it will be useless as they don't wan't third spaces. No, they want the women's spaces. If it were merely a matter of safety, third spaces should suffice. However, third spaces won't provide the "validation" and the access to vunlnerable victims that many trans identified males actually want.

Why should women do anything for you when it's obvious you don't give a f*** about women and that you only see us as human shields?

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's trans identified males who don't want to share spaces with men, you're the ones who should be advocating for third spaces. And don't give me the ridiculous excuse that no one cares about what trans identified people wants.

We’ve had this conversation. Why ask and then tell me not to answer? If you just want to rant and not actually have a conversation there’s gc main.

If you have a problem with the status quo, you should complain with the trans activists who are doing nothing to make trans spaces a possibility.

You are the ones arguing for change. The stausbquo is us having access to necessary facilities. You are arguing to have us banned from them. And without accompanying safety changes. That’s my point.

[–]BiologyIsReal 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

We’ve had this conversation. Why ask and then tell me not to answer?

Yes, we have had this conversation before and I find your claims of nobody listening to trans identified people unconvincing. So, if trans identified people are so marginalized as you said, explain to me how have they acomplished all the things I listed and more, and in such a short time.

If you just want to rant and not actually have a conversation there’s gc main.

Says the person who is contantly ranting in this sub.

You are the ones arguing for change. The stausbquo is us having access to necessary facilities. You are arguing to have us banned from them. And without accompanying safety changes. That’s my point.

You are NOT entintled to use women's spaces just because you want to. Trans identified males are using them because they don't give a dam about ignoring women's boundaries and have bully society to accept all your demands without questioning. You cry about being in danger in men's spaces, but trans identified males don't give a dam about any harm a woman may suffer as consequense of males entering formerly single-sex spaces like bathrooms, changing rooms, shelters, prisons, etcetera. And there is no lack of examples of women being hurt because of this. So, again, don't dodge the question and tell me why should we care about you when you obviously don't care about us? You only view us as human shields and necessary collateral damage to get what you want, and then get mad when women are not rushing to do whatever you want?

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We haven’t accomplished anything. Lgbt people together have done it for us, not us alone. You also wildly overestimate the protections in place for most trans people. Cherry-picking from the few places with right s doesn’t demonstrate some kind of dominating trans cabal.

Again you are the one arguing for a change from status quo. How can you argue that you are morally justified by arguing for a change that will absolutely harm trans women without doing something to mitigate that harm. You are the one arguing for something to change.

[–]BiologyIsReal 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Considering circling's baseless acussations, circling putting words in our mouth and circling calling a fellow user a monster... I'll disagree over circling being polite. All those acussations are in circling's head, both because of circling's self-hate issues and the fact that circling equals disagreeement with bigotry. The most ridiculous part of this is that circling is the one who often claims trans identified people are unlovable freaks or something like that.

[–]worried19 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I haven't followed the threads that closely, so I missed the "monster" exchange. Maybe you could link it?

circling is the one who often claims trans identified people are unlovable freaks or something like that.

This is obviously the result of low self esteem. I just feel bad this is circling's opinion of herself and seemingly other trans people.

circling equals disagreeement with bigotry.

Well, I don't know. She could probably clarify, but I haven't experienced that in our interactions.

[–]BiologyIsReal 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Here is the thread.

I agree that circling's opinion on trans identified people comes from self-hate, but circling proyects those opinions on everyone else. So, anyone don't recognizing circling's identitiy feels like a personal attack for circling. And because circling hates men, being viewed as one feels like being considered a monster even though for most people man is a neutral word. And of course, not doing anything to build third spaces -which most trans identified people don't want in the first place- is another sign of bigotry because we're not thinking in male violence on men's spaces. Honestly, I'm tired of circling and other people thinking we should care about trans identified males when they don't care in the slightest about any harm a woman may suffer because of making any women's space effectively unisex.

[–]worried19 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for that. Yeah, circling's hatred of men rivals anything I've seen from so-called feminist "man haters."

I get where you're coming from.