This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

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

It depends on how you understand "misgendering". If someone is a man via biology, socialisation, privilege, behavioural patterns etc. then calling such a man a woman for whatever reason would be misgendering. Cross-gender self-assignment is misgendering.

'Man' is a word to describe adult human males. It's innocuous, not hate speech. If you regard gender so taboo & regard it as criminally vulgar, why should that be anyone else's problem? You can create your own stipulative definition of 'man' if you want, but what gives anyone the right to erase the definition of man that refers to adult members of the male sex?

Your demands are less reasonable than the content of her reply. According to the rules BiR just needs to edit her comment, which can only be enforced by another mod.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Mods openly and admittedly breaking the rules is a problem no matter what you think of me.

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

I don't take issue with you bringing this to everyone's attention the way you have, except for the part where you make the judgement that BiR isn't fit to be a mod.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Cross-gender self-assignment is misgendering

‼️

[–]BiologyIsReal 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

Snow uses gender to mean sex.

[–]SnowAssMan 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Would you prefer if the term was mis-sexing?

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I think everyone errs when we push aside the word sex for gender. No one ever misgenders someone because they are not speaking of "gender", they are correctly sexing them or at least attempting to do that. Similarly a person who thinks their gender does not match their obvious and observable sex, that is sex dysphoria because the problem in their head is over their sex. Gender has no firm meaning, it means very different things both colloquially and when used among theorists or researchers. It is about as accurate a term as "the perfect world", what I see as a perfect world is not what anyone else means, and do I mean the geography/geology/atmosphere, or the social conditions? Or the flora and fauna? Gender has done no good to people or their ability to communicate. Please use "sex" when that is the accurate term and leave fuzzy meaningless language to those who need it to live fuzzy meaningless lives.

[–]SnowAssMan 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

"Similarly a person who thinks their gender does not match their obvious and observable sex" – talk about fuzzy language, that's beyond fuzzy, it's so sloppy it's meaningless. You can't say gender has no meaning, but continue using it as if it has one. How can someone feel that a meaningless word "doesn't match their sex"? Obviously the word has a meaning, their actions reveal as much, even if their words don't.

If every time we are referring to the male & females sexes we are to say 'sex' for accuracy's sake, then even "transgender people with a gender identity that doesn't match their sex" needs to be changed to "transsexuals with a sex identity that doesn't match their sex". Please use '"sex" yourself first, consistently, before urging others to do so.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

I think any fuzziness in what I wrote is because Gender is bullshit and using it makes everything fuzzy. I'm OK with not using it at all.

Obviously the word has a meaning, their actions reveal as much, even if their words don't.

That's how it might appear to be, but it's not necessarily true. If the word had a clear meaning, that would stand on its own regardless of their actions. Their actions reveal something about themselves, not the language they use.

then even "transgender people with a gender identity that doesn't match their sex" needs to be changed to "transsexuals with a sex identity that doesn't match their sex". Please use '"sex" yourself first, consistently, before urging others to do so.

Well, at the end there you're just being disingenuous (edited in hopes of better reflecting the mod's sense of proper decorum). How can I be talking about what bullshit gender is as word if I do not use it? Should I have typed "that which we will not say" each time I typed "gender"? But you are making a straw man: My use of the term in talking about your use of the term does not mean I'm conferring any meaning, fuzzy or otherwise, to it. We could replace South Park's "Marklar" with gender, it would not mean Marklar has a clear meaning. Gender is not used, by anyone it seems, in such a way that it has a clear meaning, other than when they use it to mean some attribute they claim to have.

They are not transexuals unless they had surgery, so we are not talking about transexuals most of the time. They do call themselves transgender, most of "them" have not had surgery. What term would you use, or are you saying we should conflate transexuals who had surgery with those who LARP as the other sex?

[–]SnowAssMan 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

How can I be talking about what bullshit gender is as word if I do not use it?

"How do I prove that a flute isn't a hammer without constantly using a flute to hammer nails into the wall, thereby convincing everyone but myself that I think it's a hammer?"

Just follow your own standards & stop using gender, & yes, that includes "transgender". The trans cult don't hold a patent on the word & you haven't been employed to enforce it. I can use gender the way everyone else does: to mean biological sex.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Then you are ignoring the meaning of the word and what "GC" is critical of. In the GCdebatesQT sub, you are on team "uses fuzzy language that obfuscates the crux of the debate". The name of the sub should be changed to include your side in that debate.

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

Gender has two meanings (predominantly: male/female, or to a lesser extent: masculinity/femininity), which can be found in everyday language, in academia, in the dictionary, everywhere, since at least the 1880s, apparently. So you're asking me to ignore the meanings of the word & allow the gender-swap cult to appropriate it. As for the name of the sub, QT & GC don't agree on the definition of gender, that's a major part of the contention. According to QT gender = gender identity = the desire to be the opposite sex proves you are the opposite sex. So I assume "GC" either refers to being critical of this definition, since GC is a reaction to QT, alternatively "GC" could refer to being critical of masculinity/femininity.

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

Enough with the name calling, FlippyKing.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I edited what I think is the offending word. I have a serious question, if a member broke a rule or series of rules, is there a time limit on seeking action against them? I asked this a few days ago, but it more like directed up towards the ether and rhetorical. Is it too late to ask months after the event for:

banning of the only person in the sub that I'm aware of who told a rape victim they should have felt sympathy for their rapist because that seems to break the no harassment rule, the no personal attack rule, the no misogyny rule, the no sexism rule, the no victim blaming rule, the rape apologia rule, and the trolling rule. That's a lot but is particularly heinous. Is there a statute of limitations on behavior that heinous? I'm asking for a non-friend who maybe should be banned.

[–]BiologyIsReal 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There is nothing so formal. I just don't mod past incidents. Circling's heinous comments on rape happenned before I joined the sub, I think. If I'd been a mod by then I'd have been much harsher. I'd ban circling if u/Houseplant wants it, though.

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

I'm not in the mood for another discussion about the word gender. I just pointed that out because some may find you comment confusing given that is not how either GC or QT usually interpret misgendering.

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

I find your qualifying remark to be most confusing of all. "Cross-gender self-reassignment is misgendering" is pretty self-explanatory. Changing it to "cross-sex self-reassignment is mis-sexing" would diminish the impact. The whole point was co-opting QT's terms, for once.