all 32 comments

[–]BiologyIsReal¡Vamos Argentina tricampeón del mundo! 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

  1. I don't think stating someone's sex (aka "misgendering") is violence.

  2. I don't even think stating someone's sex is offensive, but a matter a fact and a neutral descriptor. Trans identified people are the ones taking offense where none is intended.

  3. I think it's quite arrogant for some people to expect everyone else's see them as they see themselves regardless of reality.

  4. Someone who is secure on their own identity doesn't need the "validation" of other people, especially, not the "validation" of complete strangers. Someone getting angry about being refered as their own sex is admitting that even they don't believe in this stuff.

  5. Why should I use language I don't believe in? That is I know Buck Angel is not a man, and by using he or him for her, I would be sending the opposite menssage.

  6. Why should I lie to talk about someone who is not in the room? Why should I lie to talk about someone I have not even met?

  7. You cannot change reality through language. Even if everyone in the world used her "prefered pronouns", Buck would still not be a man.

  8. Using "inclusive language" is not a neutral act and it only serves to ofuscate the facts. A newspaper saying "She was convicted for murder and sent to a women's prison" instead of "He was convicted for murder and sent to a women's prison" is shamelessly misleading the public.

  9. We've evolved to recognize other people's sex (and without the need of pulling anyone's pants down). Asking us to ignore our own eyes and to put constant attention to any potential "misgendering" is exhausting and it slows our thoughts. Be honest, genderbender, if not with us, at least with yourself. Even you have to carefully think all those "prefered pronouns" to get them right, aren't you?

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I don't think stating someone's sex (aka "misgendering") is violence.

I don't even think stating someone's sex is offensive, but a matter a fact and a neutral descriptor. Trans identified people are the ones taking offense where none is intended.

Pronouns are not based on biology.

Someone who is secure on their own identity doesn't need the "validation" of other people, especially, not the "validation" of complete strangers. Someone getting angry about being refered as their own sex is admitting that even they don't believe in this stuff.

I am a cis woman and I am secure in my own identity. Yet when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity. Why is different about trans people?

Why should I use language I don't believe in?

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you. I don't know if Buck can be considered GC but he holds GC beliefs.

You cannot change reality through language. Even if everyone in the world used her "prefered pronouns", Buck would still not be a man.

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

Using "inclusive language" is not a neutral act and it only serves to ofuscate the facts. A newspaper saying "She was convicted for murder and sent to a women's prison" instead of "He was convicted for murder and sent to a women's prison" is shamelessly misleading the public.

Using preferred pronouns is absolutely a neutral and respectful act. Most major news and information sources use preferred pronouns, and if they didn't TRAs would boycott them. If TRAs were such a tiny minority of people, we wouldn't have this much influence.

Be honest, genderbender, if not with us, at least with yourself. Even you have to carefully think all those "prefered pronouns" to get them right, aren't you?

I know a few trans people from work and my community. Using their preferred pronouns has never been difficult.

[–]BiologyIsReal¡Vamos Argentina tricampeón del mundo! 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Pronouns are not based on biology.

Pronouns that change depending on which sex someone is (like "he" and "she" in English) are indeed based on biology. In Spanish, a group of men and women may be refered to as "ellos" because of the generic masculine, but that still is because there are at least a person of the male sex in the group. That is because sex is an easily observable characteristic we have evolve to recognize; while "gender identity", besides being unobservable, is a modern concept. You won't find references to "gender identity" prior to the mid 20th century. And it's only in the 21st century this new concept became more widespread. You could argue there is an language change going on, but I would point out this "change" is being forced from top to bottom. How can it be a natural change when "misgendering" may get you baned from social media, fired from your work, be the target of bullies, etcetera?

I am a cis woman and I am secure in my own identity. Yet when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity. Why is different about trans people?

Pronouns are not a tool to validate anyone's identity, but a way to ease communication. A text flows much better when you uses pronouns instead of repeating someone's name all the time. That is why "neopronouns" like zim or xim don't stick. Who has time to memorize the "correct" pronouns for each new person they meet?

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you. I don't know if Buck can be considered GC but he holds GC beliefs.

I don't know how you expect I return respect to someone I've never met or talked to. It's unlikely that Buck reads this forum, so who I would be offending by refering to her sex? Also, I don't think is a given that she would respect me.

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

I have a natural deep voice, I've even been mistaken for a boy in the phone/interphone, and yet I'm a woman. We'gone through this already. Female refers to the sex that produces large gametes (egg) and male, to the one who produces small gametes (sperm); and humans cannot change sex. You only named secondary sex characteristics, which are (usually) indicative of someone's sex, but they don't define someone's sex. Besides, you're being inconsist: when asked to define the words "man" and "woman", you claim none of this matters.

Using preferred pronouns is absolutely a neutral and respectful act.

You say so because you believe this stuff and because you don't think it's harmfull to women in spite of the proof we have been providing you.

Most major news and information sources use preferred pronouns, and if they didn't TRAs would boycott them. If TRAs were such a tiny minority of people, we wouldn't have this much influence.

It's not about numbers, but about who holds the power. Women are slightly more than 50% of the population and yet you'll find sexism and misogyny all around the world. Just 1% of the world populations holds most of world's wealth. The whole world is hostage to the nine nuclear powers. In the International Monetary Found the richest countries have the most number of votes ( i.e. it's not a vote per country); guess which countries are always screwed up. And I could keep going on...

If TRAs have gotten so far is because there are powerfull and rich men pushing this stuff up in the West (where it began) and in the rest of the world (though, it helps that English has become a sort of lingua franca and that there is no lack of people parroting whatever the West says).

I may expand this point some other day, but now it's getting late here.

[–]BiologyIsReal¡Vamos Argentina tricampeón del mundo! 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most major news and information sources use preferred pronouns, and if they didn't TRAs would boycott them. If TRAs were such a tiny minority of people, we wouldn't have this much influence.

I'm going to continue my reply from yesterday. TRAs have been trying to cancel J.K. Rowling for more than two years by now. However, no matter how much they they demonize her, she is still quite popular and selling lots of books worldwide. For example, I went to a bookstore recently and the Harry Potter books were visibly displayed, including the 20th aniversary editions. The movies are still broadcasted at TV, too. Moreover, their attempst at cancelling her have backfired and many people have changed their views because of the discrepance between what she actually said and TRA's overreaction, which includes countless death and rape threats (just check the peaking threads on Ovarit, for instance). Even public figures who have "denounced" her are quite happy to keep profitering off her works.

This huge failure by TRAs may be explained by: (a) TRAs are not that numerous as they claim to be, (b) she is too big to be cancelled, (c) both. In any case, this put into question TRAs' capability to influence MSM through boycotts. It's more likely they have lobbied them. Actually, scratch the "likely": they have lobbied them. Transactivists (and here I'm refering to the people at the top, not any radom saying TWAW on an random forum/social media) are very aware they need to control the narrative and, for that, they have set their eyes on MSM from the begining.

For instance, Argentine TRA have admited (*) this and explained how they "educated" local media, so they in turn could (mis)inform the public about the inconming gender identity law. They even had a media guide in Spanish to do so. Surely there must be other guides of this kind elsewhere. Although I don't remember who wrote it, it's have been linked on Ovarit an English journalist redaction manual which deals specifically on how news articles must talk about trans identified people.

And I have little doubts somehow there is money behind Media support for transgenderism, too. Truth is secondary for newsmedia; they are not going to go against their own interest. That is why you need to read the news with a critical mind.

(*) Here is an old article where they admit this and here a quotation from that article (bolding is not mine):

But perhaps the most important effect of the Court injunctions campaign has been its educational effect on public opinion. Each recognition (especially at the beginning) received much media attention and was thus a great opportunity for activists to explain to our society the importance of recognizing self-perceived gender identity, why a medical diagnosis should not be required and other issues. I must say, it was surprising to hear journalists using terms like "self-perceived identity", "de-pathologization" or "gender expression" among others.

It was also very important that we develop a "Guide for Communicators on Gender Identity" (http://www.lgbt.org.ar/archivos/folleto_identidad2_web.pdf), especially trying to educate journalists for them to use appropriate vocabulary, understanding that this would also influence the rest of society. During the campaign for equal marriage we had already noticed that many times journalists supported our cause but had no tools or knowledge to defend it. At that time we developed a little material that gave them very useful arguments, and then we did the same on gender identity.

THEIR words, not mine.

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

Pronouns are not based on biology.

Pronouns are supposed to be an indicator of someone's sex, not someone's made up sense of gender identity. Sex is strictly defined by the gametes your body was designed to produce, regardless whether your body is actually capable of producing them. Sex cannot be changed no matter what you call yourself, what hormones you take or how many plastic surgeries you have.

I am a cis woman and I am secure in my own identity. Yet when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity. Why is different about trans people?

We use "she" because you are biologically female, not to validate your identity. If you decided to call yourself a man, take hormones and insist other people use he for you we would still use she.

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you. I don't know if Buck can be considered GC but he holds GC beliefs.

So, just because Buck is nice to us means we are morally obligated to change how we speak?

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

Buck is a woman and will always be a woman.

Using preferred pronouns is absolutely a neutral and respectful act. Most major news and information sources use preferred pronouns, and if they didn't TRAs would boycott them. If TRAs were such a tiny minority of people, we wouldn't have this much influence.

No. Saying "he" for a woman is absolutely lying. When I say "women" I am referring to all AFAB adults, regardless how they identify. Just like "man" refers to all AMAB adults as I don't believe in gender identity or that sex can be changed. Like you said TRAs bully people who dare to question the trans narrative. It doesn’t mean most people agree with them, it means TRAs are effective at silencing people.

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

Pronouns are not based on biology.

Either pronouns are based in biology (which they are), or they're based in misogynistic stereotypes that a woman is someone with a pink brain, someone who enjoys misogynistic oppression, someone who likes to wear "women's" clothes etc. etc. The alternative to pronouns rooted in biology is pronouns rooted in defining men and women according to utter misogyny, and that's why radical feminists have an issue with them and don't want to use them.

Also, pronouns have always been based in biology. Trans people themselves are extremely vocal about how oppressive this societal norm is. So claiming that actually, everyone already uses pronouns based in genderfeels and trans people have nothing to complain about feels like intentionally playing dumb, since that is one of the biggest points of contention and confusion between trans activists and the majority of people.

when people use "she" for me they are validating my identity. Why is different about trans people?

People do not use "she" to validate your identity. They use "she" because it is an objective fact that you are an adult human female. Feelings, politeness, niceness, wishful thinking, your zodiac sign etc. have nothing to do with it. If I call you a vertebrate, or a mammal, I am saying that because that's what the reality is, rather than because that's what you want to hear.

If we're talking politeness, trans activists could start by not lying about and supporting the oppression that women endure as a result of their sex, and by not erasing, downplaying and twisting the language needed for feminist discourse because it hurts their feelings.

Buck is a man. He has a beard, deep voice and male levels of testosterone.

That's not what being male is. There are plenty of non-trans women who have deep voices, facial hair and abnormal testosterone levels. There are also plenty of non-trans men with no facial hair, high voices and significantly lower testosterone levels. Science has long since accounted for this. These are not people of the opposite sex, or third sex or whatever, they're either just a natural variance of male or female biology, or they have a disorder of sexual development. If anyone with male testosterone levels was automatically male, it wouldn't be possible to define a disorder where a male has male hormone levels, or any disorder defined by the sexual biological function malfunctioning. That's why no-one would bat an eye at a boy claiming he needs to see the doctor because his period didn't come in, regardless of whether that boy identified as a girl, a menstruator or a dragon.

Buck's body is a woman's body, morphed through years of maintaining an artificial hormonal imbalance (which has also lead to debilitating health issues). This is completely different from a male body that is male because it's MALE. This is a masculinised female body, not a male body, just as a castrated male with an inverted penis has nothing to do with an actual female. It is simply not scientifically possible to change one's sex in any way. The only thing you can do is artificially induce a hormonal disorder.

Even if you don't believe in this language you can still return the same respect that Buck gives to you.

Acknowledging reality is not something you do out of "niceness" or "respect". I will not pretend the Earth is only a few thousand years old just to be respectful to Creationists, nor do I expect anyone to acknowledge the actual age of the Earth solely out of politeness and to not get me offended, but rather because this is an objective, measurable fact.

[–]levoyageur718293 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I'm not interested in pretending I believe something I don't, no matter how much it makes someone happy. There are higher things than happiness.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You are not pretending you believe something you don't. You are merely respecting the choice of how someone wants to be called.

[–]levoyageur718293 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's the height of megalomania to try and control how other people talk about you. If I identify as being beautiful, are you failing to respect my Identity by saying that you think I'm not?

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

Why do you believe you know peoples thoughts so much better than they do, that you can tell what they perceive as true or not?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I guess the hard part is the expectation that I will learn to mistrust and ignore my perceptions and adopt the thoughts and language of whoever is in front of me.

Feels extremely unhealthy.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

It's not unhealthy to respect someone's pronouns. In fact if you met Buck for the first time and didn't know he was trans, you would perceive him as a man.

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

You are not capable of deciding or knowing what my perceptions are.

That’s not a power you or anyone else on the planet has. Trying to claim that you do have this ability is kind of disturbing to me.

It’s absolutely unhealthy for any person not experiencing active psychosis to disregard one’s own perceptions of the world.

It is not healthy for anyone ever to disregard their own perceptions and have someone else decide what reality is for them.

Please explain precisely how it is healthy for another person to inform you of what is real and what isn’t. As much detail as possible, preferably.

[–]cars 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Buck Angel is perceptibly female. I might get confused at first because Buck is bald and bearded, but I would be able to clock them as female. I can do this because I am male, which means I have an easier time spotting if a masculine-presenting person is female. Women can do the same thing for feminine-presenting people.

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

It's clear Buck is female. There are many clues including voice, hands, stance, demeanor and movement. Many people can pass in a photo but video and IRL there are too many clues. I'm a woman and I can correctly sex people in person or video 100% of the time.

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

It's easy to say that after the fact. Among people there is quite a variety in voice, appearance, movements, demeanor etc. Insisting that you can always tell with 100% certainty is delusional and I don't believe it for a second

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

He doesn't look female at all to me.

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

And are your perceptions the only acceptable ones? Or Are your perceptions universal and some of us simply lie and pretend we perceive differently to you?

What makes your perception of buck more valid than another persons?

[–]adungitit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

When you have people talking about how we all evolved to recognise men and women and how everyone can tell, then the fact that plenty of people can't tell goes contrary to that (though I will say, a trans activist who is obliged to pretend like anyone is whatever they say they are is not the best metric of a person's ability to acknowledge reality).

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sure not everyone is instantly identifiable as their sex but the way GB claims that because she thinks buck looks like a true and honest man we do and basically lie about it is total bullshit.

[–]BiologyIsReal¡Vamos Argentina tricampeón del mundo! 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

look =/= being

Anyways, is that, really, the only comment you're going to reply to?

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

The fact that superficial perception can be tricked does not change the reality of human biology. People think spiders are insects, but that doesn't make it so. People have mistaken me for a man, that does not make me male. It's honestly astonishing how many trans activists need to have it explained to them that holding patently false beliefs does not make them valid just because you believe in them.

I will also say, I have continuously been able to tell who's male or female in online trans spaces solely by their very typical gendered socialisation. That perfectly demonstrates why gender validation is so problematic and even straight up dangerous. Saying someone is male or female based not in whether they are male or female but solely based on hearsay or superficial appearances ignores the actually real gendered socialisation that we are all raised with, whether we acknowledge it or not.

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

Why should I lie for them?

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You're not lying. You're merely respecting someone's pronouns.

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

No, pronouns are not the personal property of people being referred to, or of people who are trying to use novel gender identities, drugs, surgeries, cosplay and make-believe to try to obscure and deny their sex. English ronouns are parts of speech of a shared language spoken by 1.35 billion people on the planet, a language that has long-standing rules of grammar and usage going back hundreds of years that many people worked hard to learn so we can communicate clearly and accurately.

I will call Buck by Buck's preferred name, Buck, rather than by Buck's legal name, Jake Miller, or Buck's given name. But that's as far as I will go with genderflecting to and about Buck. I'm not gonna be guilt-tripped into calling Buck a he when I know that Buck is a she who has taken massive amounts of exogenous T and had her breasts cut off.

During the reign of Louis XIV, the Sun King came up with and imposed new rules of etiquette on his court, servants and the people of France to keep everyone in line and always walking on eggshells. The new rules of etiquette the gender identity tyrants have come up and want to impose on everyone else are just as draconian and just as much a power play. No thank you.

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

That's like when white supremacists, religious nuts and misogynists say that we should "respect their beliefs". People should not respect beliefs rooted in supremacist ideas that are damaging to humanity.

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

There’s nothing hard about it, I just choose not to speak in a way that implies I support something I don’t support.

Im not comfortable with feeding someone’s mental illness. I’m even less comfortable feeling like I’m being pressured/forced to do so.

Mostly, because School House Rock taught me that pronouns were meant to make communication simpler, not more complicated. Preferred pronouns defeat the entire purpose of pronouns.

Why would the fact that she doesn’t threaten GC people mean we have to call her “him”?

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

GB, did you have any intention of discussing our answers?

[–]cars 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I use pronouns based on biological sex for everyone, no matter who they are. Gender identity is a spiritual belief more than anything else because it is not based in science. There are no male and female brains; the differences between a man's brain and a woman's brain are negligible, and brain scans from an HSTS transwoman would be similar to a gay man's brain scans. If you believe that you are a man despite being female or that you are a woman despite being male, that is in the realm of spirituality and religion, and I am free not to believe in or respect that religion.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Would you be OK if I referred to you as "she" even though you're a man?

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

I don't care. Call me whatever you want.

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

I would not be ok with someone saying I'm not a woman not because I would get a mental breakdown over someone acknowledging something that I'm desperately lying to myself about, but for the same reason I would not be okay with being called a sparrow, or someone calling my dog a helicopter, or claiming we live on Mars. Because this is false, and there is objective, conclusive evidence that proves it is false.

Additionally, there is an additional problem when falsehoods are pedaled for the sake of a damaging agenda. So, for example, if someone insisted that COVID is fake, or that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, this goes beyond just a mistake, or a silly misunderstanding, and is falsehood motivated by ideology. In the same way, a person calling me some measure of not-a-woman because I don't match their misogynistic ideas about women isn't just saying something that isn't in line with reality, they are also directly expressing their toxic ideology by doing that, an ideology that is rooted in the idea that a woman is a fetish, or an ideal in men's heads, or someone who plays with dolls etc.