Interesting temporising by Stephen King

submitted by Camberian from self.GenderCritical

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Anna_Nym 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The catastrophizing in responses to any critique of trans issues is part of how I peaked in the first place. No one is trying to deny trans people's existence! Most of us weren't even trying to deny people their desired pronouns or surface their birth names or anything like that.

All we've been trying to do is preserve the language to discuss our material reality and advocate for our own needs and legal rights, like progressive politics is supposed to support! We've generally looked for ways for everyone to have their needs met. Heck, I wouldn't even personally mind using "cis" as part of a framework in which I was able to advocate for the distinctiveness of my identity, needs, and rights as a cis woman. But none of that is ever enough for the activism.

It comes across as so narcissistic.

[–]materialrealityplz 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

No one is trying to deny trans people's existence!

My god they love that argument. The ridiculous hyperbole. Tbh, I think they are erasing their own existence. Saying transwomen are women/transmen are men is erasing the trans part of their identity. Maybe these TRAs should realize their own internalized transphobia. ;3

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

I've seen multiple trans people make that exact point.

If I thought I could do it without getting cancelled in my real life social circles, I would genuinely like to talk to some of the trans people I know about this. Because to me, it seems like if we take trans activism at its word and state that sex is spectrum with no connection to men/women, then this should also lead to:

a) no insurance for medical transition. How could medical transition be a medical need in this framework? Estrogen doesn't make a woman/man. Breasts don't make a woman/man. The appearance of specific gentials doesn't make a woman/man. Medical transition must be a cosmetic desire, similar to breast enhancement or a nose job, and thus should be paid for personally.

b) no sex or gender segregated spaces. What's the need for them in this framework? Since there's no physical component to men/women in this framework, what's the purpose of segregating spaces? All they do is place a burden on non-binary people, who have to either misgender themselves or have their own special places. (this legit upsets me in sports conversations... I think sports categories need to be based on biological sex not gender identity, so accommodating non-binary people isn't a problem in my desired system. But I do not understand how people can advocate for for woman/man competitive categories on the basis of gender identity and not view it as a serious problem that non-binary people have to misgender themselves to compete.)

c) no gender markers at all, actually. What purpose do they serve?

Like it all seems so transparently fake. No one can truly believe in gender ideology as advocated by the dominant forms of trans activism because it is so inconsistent.