How can you tell if someone is expressing their actual gender identity?

submitted by [deleted] from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

I would think we would all have to assume everyone's actions are genuine, but it's hard for me to believe that's really the case. Otherwise the implication seems like an end to all transphobia--the solution all along was to just have everyone say they're trans, because we've accepted the responsibility of unconditional, radical acceptance of all, and all expressions of transphobia would be committed by trans people themselves. That would therefore be a manifestation of internalized transphobia, requiring a compassionate approach due to lack of bigotry--everyone is trans and most people are expressing internalized transphobia, evidently all lashing out at each other because we are all trans. Instead of cancelling people and taking out anger on others, which seems even more transphobic because a trans person is getting angry at and trying to cancel another trans person for expressing internalized transphobia instead of trying to help them overcome their internalized transphobia, which seems highly insensitive and cruel.

[–]adungitit 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I don't understand what you're trying to say. How does assuming everyone's actions are genuine imply that everyone should say they're trans? How is it possible for everyone to be trans and for transphobia (however that's defined) to be a result of self-hatred?

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The problem is accepting that everyone is who they say they are. I'm trying to sort of point out that it's impossible to determine by that logic whether someone is being genuinely transphobic or not, because if someone says 'trans women are not women' but also says they identify in some way differently than how they were 'assigned' their sex, then that would make them trans, and therefore they would not be exhibiting transphobia but rather internalized transphobia. When trans people exhibit transphobia or what is perceived as such is usually interpreted to be a manifestation of internalized transphobia and warrants pity, but when non-trans people exhibit or say the exact same things, then that is just plain transphobia and warrants aggressive action against 'bigots'.

I'm sorry for the confusing example, I was sort trying to show how the basic logic of blindly accepting whoever says they are trans that they indeed are, that we can all be trans and therefore no one would be expressing just transphobia, it would be internalized and would warrant more compassionate treatment rather than just hostility and aggression, threatening to cancel bigots, etc.

Hopefully this clarified my point and didn't just make it worse!

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

When trans people exhibit transphobia or what is perceived as such is usually interpreted to be a manifestation of internalized transphobia and warrants pity, but when non-trans people exhibit or say the exact same things, then that is just plain transphobia and warrants aggressive action against 'bigots'.

I mean yeah, but that makes sense. The idea is that a member of an oppressed group isn't pushing an ideology to further a supremacist hierarchy in their favour, but are rather victims of their own oppression telling them they deserve their place, and brainwashed into supporting an ideology that treats them as subhuman because the dominant group says so. Obviously I disagree with the notion that trans people are oppressed by people not using whatever pronouns they tell them to, but if you do assume they are, then it makes sense to treat internalised and external bigotry differently, and that's consistent with other progressive movements.

I was sort trying to show how the basic logic of blindly accepting whoever says they are trans that they indeed are, that we can all be trans

We're not gonna get everyone saying they're trans, though, and even if they do, it wouldn't really change what the movement sees as bigoted since the concept of internalised bigotry is already known. The trans movement already instantly accepts anyone's gender regardless of anything and doesn't question it one bit. Even a rapist murderer targeting women gets treated as an actual woman the second he announces his new pronouns (and yes, there have been several cases of this). One's gender must not be questioned, ever, so it's unsurprising that how one feels about trans people or about women or gender roles or the patriarchy etc. has no bearing on anything.

Or are you saying that the mere possibility of someone being trans means we should consider their views possibly motivated by internalised transphobia rather than external? Honestly, I don't think that matters any more than it does in, say, the case of closeted homosexuals being bigots towards themselves.

The real problem with taking (specifically male) trans people on their word is that "there is no one way to be trans", and yet these people supposedly deserve the same protections and treatment that actual women do, even if their idea of being a woman is rooted in jerking off to sissy porn and wearing panties.