QT/Trans: What do the language changes actually accomplish?

submitted by loveSloaneDebate King from self.GCdebatesQT

No matter what changes to language are forced or adopted, people will always end up separating trans people from the people of the sex/gender they wish to be seen as in some capacity.

Maybe not in casual situations, but when it comes to dating and medical issues etc, all the dehumanizing language and pretending that a woman can be male or a man can be female isn’t going to change the fact that we are different and those differences are relevant in many aspects of life.

I guess what I’m asking is, if you succeed in getting women referred to as "menstruators, chest feeders, uterus havers" etc, how does that actually help trans people?

Transwomen would still have to understand that even though they’re supposedly "women", whenever women’s issues are discussed- nobody is really talking about them, unless the discussion is about how the affect women or how we should or shouldn’t include them. And transmen would have to know that all the "inclusive language" is being used because they are female. So if the issue is the association with your sex/gender or the fact that you are excluded from actual issues relevant to the sex you wish you were- what’s the point?

Further, if you’re trans, why do you want the word "woman" to include male people (or the reverse for tm), if You don’t want to be seen as male at all?

It makes more sense to argue why you fit the definition as it exists than to try to redefine it. It just seems like the redefining makes it obvious why it’s happening and makes it pointless. Even the term "cis"- I hate it, but while to qt it means "not trans, identifies as their gender at birth", for the rest of us it’s code for "real/actual". It still separates and makes it clear that anyone who isn’t "cis" is trans (or non binary or whatever the fuck).

Can try to articulate better if this makes no sense but I’ve always wanted to ask. I’m just wondering what the point is, what you think this accomplishes? Because to me, it just offends or annoys people who aren’t trans and further reminds everyone that you are. It doesn’t have the effect of making anyone see you as you wish to be seen, it just is a constant reminder that we have to tip toe around your dysphoria.

I don’t even understand how it helps to not trigger you or upset you. Even the language changes exclude you when you aren’t the sex it applies to or included you even if you wish it didn’t. I just honestly don’t get what the language stuff actually does for anyone.

To be clear, im asking about gendered/sexed terms and terms clarifying sexuality, as well the language surrounding biology/medical issues

ETA- also… can you explain how not using the language you prefer is dehumanzing, rather than just invalidating?

And why/how it is possible to invalidate someone’s sense of identity if they truly believe it?

all 47 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

It make words meaningless. It damages your mind by making you state lies you know to be lies as if they were true. It reinforces authoritarianism at the expense of free inquiry and freedom in general. It sucks. Oops, that's not an accomplishment. It makes civil discussion suck, that's an accomplishment. It chips away at your soul, not in a small gradual way but in a real tangible way unless you completely threw away your critical thinking before you first heard any of the gender/QT propaganda.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

My husband always says if "pronouns are Rohypnol" all these other language demands are what comes after Rohypnol…

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There is an amazing article by that exact name I believe.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That’s what he’s referencing

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

That's always been the aspect of QT where I see the most appeal: being able to shape and/or escape reality by making it possible for anything to be anything. But of course that can't really happen if others cannot be controlled, because they are part of reality, too.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

I'm not sure if you're saying that what you find most appealing in QT are the same things that drug addicts and drunks find appealing in their addictions or if you are saying that what you find most appealing in QT are the things creatives such as actors or writers find appealing about the kind of immersion into fictional worlds they must engage in to create the works of fiction. Or, do you think both of those are bad analogies?

More frightening though is that in order to engage in that, fiction on that level, one then has a longing for authoritarianism to compel others to play along with that fiction. At least actors and writers invite audiences or present their works to willing audiences and trust that the audience will either enjoy or reject the fiction (at least, healthy creators will do that). Drunks and addicts though, they do tend to make those around them miserable, even their dysfunctional enablers and all those who play along in it, so there may be a common ground between how I'm characterizing the attractiveness of QT and the reality of addiction and the actions of the addict towards those around the addict.

Reality is independent of our perceptions. As far as I know there is no real philosophy or approach to this kind of thing that states reality is what we think it is. Instead I've seen poor translation of ideas or bad interpretations of other's ideas that skip past the idea that we only know what we perceive and thus our mind only recognizes a version of reality that we let in. The difference between our perception of reality and actual reality is important, no amount of wishing or mental gymnastics forces the latter to conform to any individual's or group of individual's version of the former. In some theological circles that approach is making one's own self a god or just 'god', which is actually very common and can manifest itself in as many different ways as there are people.

I don't think you mean what I'm interpreting you to mean, so looking back to the two analogies I present above, addict or creative: what am I not seeing?

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Actually, you saw better than you're giving yourself credit for! I was meaning the creative analogy, and you put that quite well I think. But I can see how your second analogy works, too, but I would say while drug addiction and creative expression are fostered by control, the addict is trying to escape reality more than make their perception of reality real, while the creative individual isn't trying to escape reality so much as bring their fantasies and imagination to life. If control of other people is the objective, then the addict analogy seems more appropriate... but perhaps under the pretense that attendance to the show is optional. For me, the draw isn't control in a general sense, but rather the 'creative control' that the creator has to make fantasy a reality.

I think there is a perception of reality that is being 'manufactured' by QT that makes people think their perceptions designate reality, and that ideas are facts. I like that you bring up the concept of making oneself their own god, I think that's unspoken and intuited by people, and very much why I think TRA and QT are so attractive to people: your perception of reality IS reality!

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

drug addiction and creative expression are fostered by control, the addict is trying to escape reality more than make their perception of reality real, while the creative individual isn't trying to escape reality so much as bring their fantasies and imagination to life

Well said! Brilliant.

... bring their fantasies and imagination to life. ... your perception of reality IS reality

There are actors who never want to leave the stage, because playing the fiction is so fun. But reality is not our perception of it. A mountain is still a mountain and a river is still a river. Shared delusions might numb, but this is where the addict analogy applies. Everyone around the addicts or those involved in shared delusions are burdens on everyone around them, even their enablers (which are called allies in the woke-land). Ruined lives, ruined reproduction systems, stunted emotional and intellectual growth, and so much more are the fruits from this twisted tree of false-knowledge.

I really think the worst thing that has happened is the internet. The person who finds the reality they are surrounded by ill-fitting find a seemingly vast community of liars lying and misleading them with nonsense. I really think the vast majority can not be happy in the long run regardless of what there appears to be in the short term.

[–]ISaidWhatISaid 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There are actors who never want to leave the stage, because playing the fiction is so fun.

Don't forget really scary instances of this such as in this documentary. I wonder how trans people watch this documentary and what they make of it.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All I can say to that video is: yes, that's it or that's the temptation sometimes.

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

Ruined lives, ruined reproduction systems, stunted emotional and intellectual growth, and so much more are the fruits from this twisted tree of false-knowledge.

I think the realization of everything that one has done can be too devastating to confront for some. I'm finding it difficult for myself, and that's being stuck in it for nearly my whole life--I can't imagine how difficult it is for others who had mostly normal lives before to realize what irreversible changes have been made. It would make sense that when faced with the prospect of confronting the full reality of what has happened, people would strongly resist that confrontation, and if there are all of these people with amputations and developmental abnormalities from caused by exogenous cross sex hormones, it would make sense that they would fervently police others as well as each other.

That's a good point about the internet, I think that and particularly social media have been arenas for manipulation on a grand scale, and refugees for anyone wishing to escape their own reality. Agreed that probably nothing in the short term can lead to long-lasting happiness or peace.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think the realization of everything that one has done can be too devastating to confront for some.

This is true in other areas of life and for a great many people. But, our actions are not in a vacuum. We were lead to believe certain things, false things about ourselves and others or about circumstances, and we acted. We may have acted selfishly or desperately, both, or flippantly, but we probably learned that behavior from seeing it done to us or to others. A life time of regret is no way to live, but a sober look at one's own life might lead on there if there was nothing else.

If we spent our life chasing our desires and our "passions" (in the not just older but literally ancient sense of the word) instead of mastering them and seeing what's behind them, well very few win that game. I don't know that they are better off for it though.

I remember talking to an older weightlifter and we got philosophical at times. We talked about how "when I was younger I did ..." this or could do that and how calculation ability in math seems to decrease with age as does chess strength. What then, we wondered, is the point of a long life to the person living it? We do not go out in a blaze of glory. Looking back on those who did, we see a waste usually. But why? At the time all I had was the idea that there was something else we could gain or do, that could not be done younger-- I was very fuzzy on it though. I thought maybe there was something we might gain by reflecting on all of it when we were older, if we our minds were not limited by dysfunctions or if we lived well enough to be wise (stoicism I guess is what I'm dancing around). Sharing one's wisdom without concern for shame, either for our failures or our weaknesses or just shame for our misdeeds, didn't really come up, but that seems like something worth coming up with.

People who resist that confrontation with themselves, as you say above, refuse to be humble. That's a real shame. I believe this "true self" people so often run around looking for is there to be found after choosing humility (a tough choice, and elusive even when chosen). Real honest humility is a virtue for a reason, regardless of how little it is respected today. Especially when we think of just how short our lives are, how little of human history we lived through and how that, those cultural norms that are also so fleeting, may have blown us around like a leaf in a tornado. In the end, if we are able to step back and reflect on it: did we rise above it all, all the BS, or were we dragged down into its muck pretending the muck of it all was the point?

I don't know that I have answers (other than what worked for me), other than to say: the muck of it all is not the point, and that my life in this moment of time should not be stained by this moment of time even though it is. I look at the powerful and the rich and the famous, and I find them detestable. I listen to those telling us what to think, who to hate, what to do, and I'm disgusted. And yet I mock, and get angry, I get frustrated, I hold resentments, I pretend I'm not still making up for humiliations I felt so long ago I can't properly remember them.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It makes more sense to argue why you fit the definition as it exists than to try to redefine it. It just seems like the redefining makes it obvious why it’s happening and makes it pointless.

This is really great point and something that confuses me too. If you have to try to convince people to change the word so you can me a part of it it seems like admitting that you aren’t naturally.

So if the issue is the association with your sex/gender or the fact that you are excluded from actual issues relevant to the sex you wish you were- what’s the point? Further, if you’re trans, why do you want the word "woman" to include male people (or the reverse for tm), if You don’t want to be seen as male at all?

None of the language stuff matters to me, as a trans person, because I’m not seen as a part of that group, but it does matter to me because it hurts women I feel like. I also don’t like being asked to list/state my pronouns places and it’s getting more and more difficult not to. If people want to have preferred pronouns, that is fine, but the rest of us shouldn’t be forced to participate in normalizing it I feel like. Same with "menstruators, chest feeders, uterus havers". I’m so over it.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The pronoun thing is another thing that seems counterproductive to me! If you have to ask/declare, it’s meaningless.

If you have to tell me you’re a she/he/they, you’ve also told me you understand that nobody actually sees you as such.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Totally! If anything declaring pronouns should itself be invalidating, yet people seem to want to do it and ask others to.

[–]FlippyKingSadly this sub welcomes rape apologists and victim blaming. Bye! 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think the fact that they were trying to change the definition was only revealed or discovered after all the charm of "it's science" and "lady-brain" and "well, they 'present as' therefore they are" wore off and the incel-to-transcel pipeline was noticed.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (32 children)

Maybe not in casual situations, but when it comes to dating and medical issues etc, all the dehumanizing language and pretending that a woman can be male or a man can be female isn’t going to change the fact that we are different and those differences are relevant in many aspects of life.

This is precisely the reason we use terms like "cis" and "trans". Cis women and trans women are both women, and we use the broader term "women" to refer to both groups. When differences are relevant to a discussion, we use the adjectives "cis" and "trans." In some cases biology is relevant like dealing with medical issues or even dating. In that case we use the phrase "assigned fe/male at birth." But we don't believe biology is relevant most of the time.

I guess what I’m asking is, if you succeed in getting women referred to as "menstruators, chest feeders, uterus havers" etc, how does that actually help trans people?

The point of this is to make health information accessible to trans masc people. On r/FTM there are posts by people who claim they can't access information or services related to periods, PCOS, etc. because most of the information is written for women and they are not women. Here are some excerpts from this thread

I use a menstrual cup and honestly it has changed my life but it took me months to finally buy it because researching it was exhausting with how much everything was gendered, I'm not even dysphoric about periods but having to get information, resources and finally buy a product that was so clearly targeted at women was awful.

When trying to access healthcare concerting female anatomy post-transition it can be hard if everything is gendered towards women. I’ve heard of a post transition trans man with endometriosis who would not have doctors take him on because they couldn’t have male patients in the system with these diagnoses.

I’m post transition and stealth. I had a really bad UTI a while back and I went to the pharmacy to buy a test for it (not even a medication, a test to check if you have a UTI) that was only available to buy for women. I had an awful interaction with the pharmacist/seller in front of other customers that I’m transsexual pre-bottom surgery, I have a vagina and a short urethra, and this test is for people like me. We argued for 5 minutes with me asking how the fuck can I prove to her I don’t have a penis? I had to walk out, came back 10 minutes later, asked to speak to her manager, she said there wasn’t one, I asked to file a complaint, she scoffed and finally gave it to me. What was I supposed to do whip my cunt out in Boots?? Fucking humiliating and awful time and I was already in pain. If this was made to purchase by “people with vaginas” it wouldn’t happen. That interaction was way more dysphoria-inducing lol than seeing “people with vaginas” used in reference to trans men. I was on a verge of calling my trans woman friend who lived close by to come buy it for me -_- ironically.

I am nonbinary. I am not a woman and not a man. And I do not want to have to be called a woman just because I have a vagina and breasts.

There are cis women who don't have periods. Who don't menstruate. There are trans women who don't. It is not a woman's experience.

from a public health perspective inclusive language gets trans people to get health care they would otherwise avoid.

Here are some more posts and articles about the struggles trans men face with regards to language and health care.

Why cant we just use inclusive language for priods? (CW: talk about priods)

What it's like to go to the gynecologist as a Black trans man: 'It's so dehumanizing' - Yahoo!

Transwomen would still have to understand that even though they’re supposedly "women", whenever women’s issues are discussed- nobody is really talking about them, unless the discussion is about how the affect women or how we should or shouldn’t include them.

When I talk about women's issues, I include all women including trans women unless it's something specific to biology. Trans women who physically present as women experience sexual harassment, lower pay, not being taken seriously as people who present male at work, etc.

Further, if you’re trans, why do you want the word "woman" to include male people (or the reverse for tm), if You don’t want to be seen as male at all?

Trans women aren't male, and trans men aren't female.

[–]strictly 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

This is precisely the reason we use terms like "cis" and "trans".

Many women and men are neither cisgender or transgender, they just don’t have gender identities. Your solution would misgender them with false cisgender gender identities by default which should be unacceptable for someone who claims to be against msigendering.

When differences are relevant to a discussion, we use the adjectives "cis" and "trans."

There exists no reason to group biological females who aren’t taking hormones with biological males who are taking hormones, different sex, and the latter group also has a gender identity which many of the former group find unrelatable and alienating.

In that case we use the phrase "assigned fe/male at birth." But we don't believe biology is relevant most of the time.

You might not find biology relevant in many cases but its relevance is still much greater than gender identity which has a relevance on par of a zodiac sign, only relevant to those specifically into it.

On r/FTM there are posts by people who claim they can't access information or services related to periods, PCOS, etc. because most of the information is written for women and they are not women. Here are some excerpts from this thread

Had they not been female it would have been psychically impossible for them to menstruate and have PCOS. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

researching it was exhausting with how much everything was gendered,

I agree that forced gendering is a horrible thing and that is why I strongly disagree with the transactivist goal of genderfying language. I bet many of the people transactivists msigender with cisgender gender identities also dislike find the gendering of female products.

If this was made to purchase by “people with vaginas” it wouldn’t happen.

We would avoid this by be keeping the word woman sexed instead of genderfying it to gender identity, had the pharmacist not genderfied the word woman then this probably wouldn’t have happened. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

I’ve heard of a post transition trans man with endometriosis who would not have doctors take him on because they couldn’t have male patients in the system with these diagnoses.

The doctor should have realized any female can identify as a man, and that man-identifying females are not less likely than other females to get endometriosis. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

Here are some more posts and articles about the struggles trans men face with regards to language and health care.

The language struggle they have is somewhat self-inflected. Language has become more genderfied as transactivists have lobbied for it become more genderfied, and that also increases gender dysphoria in the overall population as people don’t like being put in gender boxes.

When I talk about women's issues, I include all women including trans women

Who do you include, all people with certain gender identity? Many of those who face women's problem don't have gender identities, if woman is a gender identity to then you can't include them without disrespecting them by misgendering them with cisgender gender identities. And if woman isn't a gender identity to you, why should woman-identifying males be included just for identifying a certain way? The way I see it you have three choices, exclude all women without gender identities, misgender women without gender identities, or exclude woman-identifying males. I think the middle option is the most morally abhorrent one.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

Many women and men are neither cisgender or transgender, they just don’t have gender identities. Your solution would misgender them with false cisgender gender identities by default which should be unacceptable for someone who claims to be against msigendering.

Everyone has a gender identity and all of us are either cis or trans.

There exists no reason to group biological females who aren’t taking hormones with biological males who are taking hormones, different sex, and the latter group also has a gender identity which many of the former group find unrelatable and alienating.

There are also many cis women who do not find gender identity/ trans women alienating. These women will call you "TERF" for expressing a GC opinion and are supportive of trans rights. In fact, cis women are more likely to support trans rights than cis men.

According to a PPRI study, 51% of men support requiring transgender individuals to use bathrooms corresponding to their assigned sex at birth, compared to 40% of women.

According to a poll, 59% of men support banning trans women in women's sports compared tp 46% of women. 29% of men oppose banning trans women in women's sports compared to 34% of women.

Had they not been females it would have been psychically impossible for them to menstruate and have PCOS. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

They aren't females, but they menstruate and have PCOS. This is why we use inclusive language, to separate sex/gender from these things.

I agree that forced gendering is a horrible thing and that is why I strongly disagree with the transactivist goal of genderfying language. I bet many of the people transactivists msigender cisgender gender identities also dislike find the gendering of female products.

If we would use gender-neutral language, we would use the term "menstrual products" and not "female products."

We would avoid this by be keeping the word woman sexed instead of genderfying it to gender identity, had the pharmacist not genderfied the word woman then this probably wouldn’t have happened. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

Having a vagina doesn't necessarily make you a woman. That's the point. It only means you have a vagina.

The doctor should have realized any female can identify as a man, and that man-identifying females are not less likely than other females to get endometriosis. This is a typical case where biology is more relevant than gender identity.

This is exactly why we use inclusive language.

Who do you include, all people with certain gender identity? Many of those who face women's problem don't have gender identities, if woman is a gender identity to then you can't include them without disrespecting them by misgendering them with cisgender gender identities. And if woman isn't a gender identity to you, why should woman-identifying males be included just for identifying a certain way? The way I see it you have three choices, exclude all women without gender identities, misgender women without gender identities, or exclude woman-identifying males. I think the middle option is the most morally abhorrent one.

Everyone has a gender identity. If someone is born female and identifies as a woman, they are a cis woman. Same with cis men.

When I talk about women's struggles, I include every woman who experiences that struggle. Trans women absolutely deal with unequal pay, not being taken seriously at work, street harassment, being expected to smile, etc. When I talk about pregnancy and periods I'm obviously not including trans women because they don't experience those things.

[–]strictly 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Everyone has a gender identity and all of us are either cis or trans.

We don't, you are not all people, it's not up to you to gender others against their will and dictate what inside their mind when you only have access to your own mind . I also thought transactivists like you usually claim to support agender and nonbinary people, you don't then, you will still go ahead and misgender them with false gender identities? If you don't have empathy for those without gender identities, how can you expect us to have empathy for those who have?

There are also many cis women who do not find gender identity/ trans women alienating

Only those with cisgender gender identities find it not alienating, as they have a gender identity like you, but many of us are not cisgendered and don't have gender identities. I don’t care if you put yourself in gender box, your mind, your choice, but you have no right decide for other people, who don't even share you cisgender gender identity, that they must be okay with being put in a gender box.

According to a PPRI study, 51% of men support requiring transgender individuals to use bathrooms corresponding to their assigned sex at birth, compared to 40% of women.

40% against is big number.

According to a poll, 59% of men support banning trans women in women's sports compared tp 46% of women. 29% of men oppose banning trans women in women's sports compared to 34% of women.

More people in both sexes supported the ban than opposed, not surprising.

They aren't females, but they menstruate and have PCOS. This is why we use inclusive language, to separate sex/gender from these things.

Had they not been of the female reproductive sex it would have been physically impossible which means they are of the female reproductive sex. Sex refers to sex, not gender: As you say yourself, sex and gender should never be conflated so when I use words for the two sexes I indeed refer to sex, not gender anything.

f we would use gender-neutral language, we would use the term "menstrual products" and not "female products."

Female is a sex, not gender so it’s always gender-neutral, unless you are genderist who has genderfied the word, which is morally wrong as you by that action genderfy the unwilling.

Having a vagina doesn't necessarily make you a woman. That's the point. It only means you have a vagina.

Woman just means you are an adult human of the female reproductive sex so any adult human of the female reproductive sex is a woman as that is the only thing it refers to. If it means anything else to you then you are genderist who has genderfied the word, which is morally wrong as you by that action genderfy the unwilling.

This is exactly why we use inclusive language.

Woman is inclusive to all adult humans of the female reproductive sex, unless you are a genderist who has genderfied the word, which is morally wrong as you by that action genderfy the unwilling.

Everyone has a gender identity.

No, they don’t. If you want other people to take your word for it when you say you have a gender identity then you should give other people the same respect when they say they lack one.

If someone is born female and identifies as a woman, they are a cis woman. Same with cis men.

Woman is not an identity to us, it’s simply being an adult human of the female reproductive sex, something none of us had any say in. If your don’t understand what we mean with woman translate it to “adult human AFAB” in your mind as that is the transactivist way of saying the same thing. You don’t call man-identifying females cisgender just for knowing they are “AFAB” so you shouldn’t do that others either. Knowing biology is not an identity.

When I talk about women's struggles, I include every woman who experiences that struggle.

What is a woman to you? A gender identity? Then it’s absolutely disrespectful of you to include anyone without a gender identity as that is msigendering. But if you exclude everyone without a gender identity you will have excluded people who have faced what we traditionally mean with women’s struggles, so your definition of women’s struggles would be different. It would refer to struggles some people face for having a certain gender identity. I don’t have a gender identity so I don’t know if people with gender identities, like you, tend to face certain issues when they come out as having a gender identity. Either way, if you think those with gender identities need to organize I don’t mind that, but it shouldn’t include anyone without a gender identity. Then we can have a different sex based organization for struggles we face for being of the female reproductive sex.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (10 children)

We don't, you are not all people, it's not up to you to gender others against their will and dictate what inside their mind when you only have access to your own mind . I also thought transactivists like you usually claim to support agender and nonbinary people, you don't then, you will still go ahead and misgender them with false gender identities? If you don't have empathy for those without gender identities, how can you expect us to have empathy for those who have?

Everyone has a gender identity, even agender people. Agender is a gender identity. I never misgender anyone. If someone says they're a woman they're a woman. If someone says they're a man they're a man. If someone says they're non-binary, they're non-binary. If someone's gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth, they are by definition cisgender. If someone identifies with a different gender than assigned at birth, they are by definition transgender. Everyone has a gender assigned at birth and that is tied to biology.

Only those with cisgender gender identities find it not alienating, as they have a gender identity like you, but many of us are not cisgendered and don't have gender identities. I don’t care if you put yourself in gender box, your mind, your choice, but you have no right decide for other people, who don't even share you cisgender gender identity, that they must be okay with being put in a gender box.

Most people are cis, even those who don't like the term cis.

More people in both sexes supported the ban than opposed, not surprising.

My point is women are more likely than men to support transgender people. Everyday Feminism was founded by an Asian cis woman named Sandra Kim. The BabyCenter community supports trans rights and they are a pregnancy and birth board. They will quickly call you a TERF if you express a gender critical opinion. My point is regarding transgender stuff, men are more likely to be on your side than women.

Had they not been of the female reproductive sex it would have been physically impossible which means they are of the female reproductive sex. Sex refers to sex, not gender: As you say yourself, sex and gender should never be conflated so when I use words for the two sexes I indeed refer to sex, not gender anything.

They are not female and female refers to anyone who consistently identify as female.

Female is a sex, not gender so it’s always gender-neutral, unless you are genderist who has genderfied the word, which is morally wrong as you by that action genderfy the unwilling.

The point is we are trying to de-sex periods if that's the term you want to use. We are saying in humans, periods ≠ female.

Woman just means you are an adult human of the female reproductive sex so any adult human of the female reproductive sex is a woman as that is the only thing it refers to. If it means anything else to you then you are genderist who has genderfied the word, which is morally wrong as you by that action genderfy the unwilling.

Men and enbies who get periods are not female. Using the terms "women" and "female" don't include them.

No, they don’t. If you want other people to take your word for it when you say you have a gender identity then you should give other people the same respect when they say they lack one.

That's not how gender identity works.

What is a woman to you? A gender identity? Then it’s absolutely disrespectful of you to include anyone without a gender identity as that is msigendering. But if you exclude everyone without a gender identity you will have excluded people who have faced what we traditionally mean with women’s struggles, so your definition of women’s struggles would be different. It would refer to struggles some people face for having a certain gender identity. I don’t have a gender identity so I don’t know if people with gender identities, like you, tend to face certain issues when they come out as having a gender identity. Either way, if you think those with gender identities need to organize I don’t mind that, but it shouldn’t include anyone without a gender identity. Then we can have a different sex based organization for struggles we face for being of the female reproductive sex.

Everyone has a gender identity. Anyone who presents outwardly as female experiences female oppression, regardless of birth sex.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gonna ask for what must be the hundredth time- where do you get the authority to decide these things for all of humanity?

And why are you so quick to make these declarations but so unable to show any type of proof/evidence/science to justify dictating your will to the whole of society?

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

You know, everybody here already knows your views. It is not a good debate tactic to just restate them over and over. You have to convince us that your views are better than ours- they are more factual, or they will lead to a better world, or something else that might make people change their minds. As it is you aren't debating and you aren't accomplishing anything, unless you are only here to recite catechism.

[–]strictly 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Agender is a gender identity

The definition of agender is not having a gender identity. Go to the agender subreddit and see how much they like being misgendered by you.

I never misgender anyone.

Insisting the all people without gender identities have one is misgendering, which you have done multiple times in this thread alone.

If someone says they're a woman they're a woman.

Is their definition of woman adult human of the female reproductive sex? That’s not a gender identity. Is your definition of woman adult human of the female reproductive sex? We already know it isn’t. Therefore you should use your word for adult human of the female reproductive sex when referring to them, not your word for a gender identity. So yeah, you are are misgendering them by referring to a gender identity when they referred to biology.

If someone's gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth, they are by definition cisgender.

You insist those without matching gender identities have one. People don’t like being lied about.

Most people are cis, even those who don't like the term cis.

A cisgendered person wouldn’t feel insulted when they are affirmed in their so called gender identity. You say you are cis, is feeling incongruent and lied about typical to you when you are called cis? If that’s the normal “cisgender” way of feeling I don’t see how you can believe in the existence of transgender people at all as they would just be regular cis people who just happen to dislike their cisgender gender identity to you.

Everyday Feminism was founded by an Asian cis woman named Sandra Kim.

Everyday Feminism supported the video where Riley J. Dennis shamed homosexuals for their sexual orientation so I don't care if that homophobic organization disagrees with me.

My point is regarding transgender stuff, men are more likely to be on your side than women.

I don’t adopt views because of the sex distribution of the views so I couldn’t care less if men are more likely to agree with me.

They are not female and female refers to anyone who consistently identify as female.

That is you genderfying a reproductive sex which is morally wrong, people shouldn’t be assigned with gender identities by you just for being born with a certain body.

The point is we are trying to de-sex periods if that's the term you want to use. We are saying in humans, periods ≠ female.

Periods are sexed, only one sex is physically capable of having periods, that's biology.

Men and enbies who get periods are not female. Using the terms "women" and "female" don't include them.

It’s physically impossible for people without a female biology to get periods, so yes, female include all people who menstruate. Gender identity never excludes anyone from being female as female is a biologic sex and female biology doesn’t prevent man- or nonbinary identities from forming, which trans people themselves are proof of.

Everyone has a gender identity. Anyone who presents outwardly as female experiences female oppression, regardless of birth sex.

Having a female body is neither gender identity nor a presentation, none of us got a say in our biological sex. You obviously don’t respect people without gender identities as you insist on misgendering us so I don't get why you expect us to more empathy for people with gender identities than you have for us. You evidently don’t think it’s a big deal to make people feel wrong and incogruent by misgendering them as long as that person lacks a gender identity. Personally I wouldn’t even have been against affirming trans people had the wanted affirmations not relied on everyone without a gender identity being msisgendered, but expecting us to to be okay with being constantly misgendered in the name of making trans people feel better is unacceptable.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The definition of agender is not having a gender identity. Go to the agender subreddit and see how much they like being misgendered by you.

Agender means being neither a man or a woman. It's part of being non-binary. You can't be agender and be a woman at the same time. You are welcome to call yourself agender, just next week don't say you're oppressed because you're a woman because agender people are neither men or women. Also, it is agender people who are promoting inclusive language because the term "women" doesn't include them when discussing periods or uteruses.

Everyday Feminism supported the video where Riley J. Dennis shamed homosexuals for their sexual orientation so I don't care if that homophobic organization disagrees with me.

I don't agree with everything Everyday Feminism writes but they have excellent articles about racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, ageism or any other type of oppression.

I don’t adopt views because of the sex distribution of the views so I couldn’t care less if men are more likely to agree with me.

Cool, but if the transgender movement is so harmful to women then why are women more likely to support it? And don't tell me women are socialized to be nice and kind and sweet. Most women are capable of critical and rational thinking and not everything we support is out of emotion.

That is you genderfying a reproductive sex which is morally wrong, people shouldn’t be assigned with gender identities by you just for being born with a certain body.

Most of the trans community does not define sex by biology.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

but if the transgender movement is so harmful to women then why are women more likely to support it?

There were women who protested the suffragettes and black slaves in America who protested being freed…

Sometimes people side against their best interests. It’s usually due to ignorance, manipulation, or fear.

Most women are capable of critical and rational thinking and not everything we support is out of emotion.

Most. Not all. And a lot of causes that gain public support gain it because of emotional reactions.

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

Agender means being neither a man or a woman.

Agender means not having gender identity, that's the definition.

You can't be agender and be a woman at the same time.

Agender people can’t be women to you you as you have genderfied that word into gender identitiy, making it misgendering if you assign an agender person with that gender identity. You could have chosen not genderfy woman though and let it stay about biology.

You are welcome to call yourself agender

I meet the definition, many people do.

don't say you're oppressed because you're a woman

I lack gender identity but I still share adult human female biology with Elliot Page, thus like Elliot Page I can face sexism because of my biology, and woman is the word for adult humans with a biology like me and Elliot Page.

I don't agree with everything Everyday Feminism writes but they have excellent articles about racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, ageism or any other type of oppression.

They paid a homophobe to tell homosexuals that we need overcome our sexuality, they haven’t shown any regret about it.

Cool, but if the transgender movement is so harmful to women then why are women more likely to support it?

If so few women find women-identifying males harmful in female sports why do women who want to ban women-identifying males from female sport outnumber the women against the ban?

And don't tell me women are socialized to be nice and kind and sweet. Most women are capable of critical and rational thinking and not everything we support is out of emotion.

Why don't you tell why you think you are more likely than a man to be against the ban?

Most of the trans community does not define sex by biology.

If trans people and trans activists have genderfied the words for sex too it means they engage in misgendering when they call people male and female too, which is morally wrong as people shouldn’t be misgendered just for having a sex, aka a biology they had no say in.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Can you define what presenting as female is? Cause I’ve never presented myself as female, I just look female by nature. Presenting as something implies a degree of will and deliberate actions that must be female. What are they? When did the world shrink down to only be mumsnet and everyday feminism? Are there no other women on the internet? On the planet? You refer to these websites like they are a collection of the thoughts of all women, not a small demographic.

How do we have gender identity without knowing it? What are you defining gender identity as? Imo you’re conflating awareness of ones sex, which practically everyone has, with a gender identity and then projecting that incorrect idea.

How did you come to know the identities of everyone? How did you come to understand them better than the individuals to whom they belong? You must understand them better to be able to determine they have a gender identity when they themselves do not see it.

Can you actually bother to answer me for once? Seems weird how you only answer one in every ten things I ask you, and only when you can copy +paste a slogan in, rather than actually typing out some thoughts.

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

When did the world shrink down to only be mumsnet and everyday feminism?

Houseplant, I don't get why you've brought up Mumsnet here. GenderBender mentioned Everyday Feminism and the Baby Center, not Mumsnet. Mumsnet is not like those other sites. Mumsnet is the place on the internet that I feel most at home. This is particularly true of the Feminism/Women's Rights section - which is widely known as the "radicalization portal" for the "terven" - and whose regular users are extremely well-informed and intelligent. But it's also true of the rest of Mumsnet too.

Mumsnet is place where millions of women - and many men - from a wide variety of backgrounds, walks of life and numerous different countries with highly varying points of view engage in vigorous debate about all sorts of topics - and do a lot of swearing too. It's not a site just for mums or parents, nor is it concerned solely with matters having to do with pregnancy, babies and child-rearing - though concern for children and other vulnerable groups is big on the site. But many users don't have children. I personally went to Mumsnet for the feminism, and it's the feminism that brings me back on a daily basis.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Made a mistake with names lol

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are you really trying to tell us we all have gender identities and we just don’t know about them?

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Everyone has a gender identity. If someone is born female and identifies as a woman, they are a cis woman. Same with cis men.

Talk about cultural imperialism! Nothing like a young person from a Western country of the "Global North" decreeing from on high that the luxury, niche belief she and her friends hold dear is a universal trait innate to all people everywhere on planet earth. This is akin to saying all human beings have souls, and souls stained with original sin too. Or all human beings believe in America and apple pie and enjoy playing video games.

When I talk about women's struggles, I include every woman who experiences that struggle. Trans women absolutely deal with unequal pay, not being taken seriously at work, street harassment, being expected to smile, etc. When I talk about pregnancy and periods I'm obviously not including trans women because they don't experience those things.

So pregnancy and periods are no longer "women's struggles" but presumably enlarged prostates, erectile dysfunction and ball sac chafing are? In this brave and stunning new world order, which group of women have to worry most about contraception? Which ones need access to abortion?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Hold on-

If transwomen are not male and transmen are not female, why do we need to rework language at all?

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (12 children)

Because not everyone who gets periods is female and not everyone who has a prostate is male.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Then you’ve effectively rendered sex meaningless and end up making access harder for people who don’t use English as a first language.

What’s so great about making access to female health services harder for immigrants?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Not to mention people who didn’t have access to the best education or aren’t well informed on anatomy/biology.

So now someone who may not know that male people specifically (and I guess according to u/genderbender some female people… idk how that works?) have prostates (but knows he’s a male) won’t know that he’s a “prostate haver” and won’t know that information is relevant to him.

So gender inclusive language is actually ableist and exclusionary to quite a few people. It can make medical information less accessible to more people than sexed language would offend.

…So naturally any person of either sex who isn’t aware that they need regular sex specific medical exams because they aren’t referred to with any acknowledgment of sex who ends up getting sick was a victim of Literal Violence at the hands of QT and if they die, that’s MURDER, right? That’s how that works?

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Not to mention people who didn’t have access to the best education or aren’t well informed on anatomy/biology.

To the groups you mentioned I'd add people who might have access to education and information but still have retention/memory problems or intellectual impairments. There are lots of people in the world with sub-average intelligence or limited cognitive abilities, or difficulty with retrieving info they once learned - but one basic thing they all tend to know for certain is whether they are a boy/man or girl/woman.

The terminology that GenderBender favors is also exclusionary to trans-identified people who develop dementia.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yes I had them in mind but didn’t know the best way to word that! Thank you!

Also, I read a few days ago that trans people with dementia tend to forget they transitioned and feel out of place in their bodies (their transitioned bodies) and “identify” as their birth sex again. I’m honestly super curious about that and was just wondering if you knew more about it?

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know anything more about it. I just know it happens. I imagine it might have something to do with the way certain essential information and self-knowledge that gets acquired early in life and is of fundamental importance gets recorded and stored in the brain, which means it still can be retrieved even after - or especially after? - dementia sets in. It might be similar to how people who've had massive strokes and lost almost all their language skills, vocabulary, understanding of grammar etc still know and will say curse words - and the way people in fear or on death's door automatically call for "mama" (or the equivalent word in their native tongue).

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nah she’s privileged because she’s “cis” even if she had to flee murderous persecution to a foreign country that almost exclusively uses one of the most difficult to learn languages, regarding human anatomy that she has never been taught or exposed to knowledge of, and then makes changes to the language that muddy the meanings of that anatomy, it’s really her own fault. She probably didn’t even think about how transmen might feel if she asked for a woman doctor.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So… no, you can’t cite proof. You can only repeat your opinion.

And you are once again ignoring the majority of what I said and only responding with a regurgitation of the party line.

Is there a reason you can’t back up these claims despite thinking the whole world should accept them and adjust to what you’re claiming?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

How do you know when someone does have a prostate?

How do you know who will get a period?

Like how would any random person know if they’d have either of those things? How does someone find out?

Does anyone have both a prostate and a period? Why or why not?

Like- how do we know who is a uterus haver or capable of getting pregnant? How do we know who makes sperm or has a prostate?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

Everyone just wandered around with no idea that everyone’s bodies fell into one of two categories 99% of the time, humping each other and the trees, convinced babies could and would come out of literally anybody. Very noble savage flavoured.

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Don't forget, that was until the white men came and taught them about males and females.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ahh yes, of course the simple natives of everywhere were too deeply connected to nature and magic and allegedly also too stupid to ever clue on to who gestated and birthed and who just ejaculated.

Somehow elevating the fetishised image of a mystical shaman whilst simultaneously kicking him down as less intelligent or aware than any other animal.

Baffling how acceptable racism is to people as soon as gender rhetoric is the justification.

[–]BiologyIsReal 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

If only we had a word for people with uterus or who have periods or who can get pregnant...

[–]loveSloaneDebate King[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

  1. Cite proof that transwomen are women? As in actual evidence, instead of you just claiming it as if it’s fact? Explain how sex is assigned?

  2. Explain what “cis” women and transwomen have in common that makes them both a type of woman? Again- looking for fact based sources, not online social media forums or just a statement made by you

  3. As far as the language stuff- why can’t we just use male and female? Instead of the dehumanizing language? Covers everyone and is easy to understand and not offensive to 99%

  4. Sounds to me like transmen are making a problem out of nothing. Sounds to me like the therapists of trans people should teach them better coping skills but okay thanks for the links lol

  5. Do you think there aren’t other types of men who face sexual harassment (literally anyone can) or even lower pay (are immigrants being paid less than they should all women?!)? Do you think that everyone else except transwomen and women have no issues with not being taken seriously at work? You don’t think homosexual men who look like men face that issue too sometimes? Or are they also women now?

  6. Can you site some type of proof that transwomen are not male and that transmen aren’t female? Can’t seem to find any myself. Odd that.

  7. Are you basing what a woman/man is on how others treat them? As if everyone gets treated one of two ways? You do realize some (most) trans people don’t pass and are treated as visibly trans, not their target sex? Or is that an inconvenience you don’t factor in to your comments?

  8. Do you actually understand what sex is and what the words male and female mean? Can you define gender, sex, male, female, man, boy, girl, and woman? And also explain the difference between gender and gender identity?

Eta:

  • 9. Is it that information is not accessible, or just that it’s not written to cater to their ideology?