I know its been discussed before, but I need clarification again - why is Transgender so much different than someone saying they are Transracial? I understood before - gender is not biological, etc. but now with the blurring of biology within this ideology I am confused with this argument.

submitted by lunarenergy8 from (self.GenderCritical)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Astrid2448 39 insightful - 4 fun39 insightful - 3 fun40 insightful - 4 fun -  (5 children)

First of all, I largely agree with your reasoning. But isn’t it interesting how when it comes to non-white people, we can stop and say “hey, given our racist past and present, shouldn’t we be careful about this?” but even suggesting that we do that for women is unacceptable. Black people were literal slaves, considered 3/5 human, and they still got the right to vote before women did. There is so much sexism in our society even today.

Additionally, there is the issue that “should be” isnt the same as “is”. It would be nice if skin color meant nothing. In reality, racism (both conscious and subconscious) is a serious problem and has been for all of human history. When some white person claims to be black and uses that to, for example, speak on behalf of blacks people, take positions in black organizations, win black scholarships, police the speech of black people, and so on, that seems gross.

[–]transwoman 14 insightful - 4 fun14 insightful - 3 fun15 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah I definitely think it's problematic (kinda overused word but that pretty much encompasses the issue). Natal women should be able to talk about issues that affect them, and it's extremely messed up that much of the trans movement (especially online) seems to shut down people for talking about the basics of biology and oppression of those who are female. It's understandable that many natal women are hesitant about the idea of trans people (trans women especially), given the history of societal, political, and economic oppression they've faced. Honestly, I think the idea of a transracial person is more convincing than the idea of a transgender person.

But I overall believe that my line of thought for transracial people follows through with transgender people, specifically for those of us who undergo medical treatment or surgical processes. While our natal or "natural" sex might not be the one we wish it was, if socially speaking a trans women is regarded as a woman or a trans man is regarded as a man, I don't see a particular issue with this since gender is largely ambiguous anyway, and a person's sex should be considered an inconsequential part of a person.

Edit: I just noticed you added more to your response, so I'll respond to the second part below:

Yeah I agree that the distinction of "should be" and "is" is very important. I do still stand by my points here however, given the ambiguity of the concepts of race and gender in the social and cultural context.

[–]BEB 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Sir, you revealed your maleness in this sentence:

"a person's sex should be considered an inconsequential part of a person. "

You will never get it. We WOMEN go through all sorts of hell solely because of our female bodies.

To dismiss our sex, and our experiences as the result of our biology, not to mention our experiences because of society's expectation of us because we are female, means you have ZERO idea of what we are, how we feel, or what are LIVED EXPERIENCES are.

Because while women are each very different, and our bodily experiences vary, I guarantee that another women and I could bond over periods, or menopause, or ovarian cysts, or being chased down a dark street, or cornered in an office after work hours, in a way you never can, and your statement just proves it.

The entitlement...

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

I was saying that a person's sex should not lead one to be treated differently or othered in society. I was not in any way trying to undermine the lived experiences and oppression of natal women. That sentence highlights an end goal of what should be, that sex should be inconsequential, not that it actually is inconsequential when we're discussing sex-based oppression.

I've had a couple of great discussions in this thread with people who took my views at face value and in good faith, rather than extrapolating them into something they aren't, as you have done. I'm not interested in conversations with those unwilling to have an honest discussion. Take care.

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

I was not in any way trying to undermine the lived experiences and oppression of natal women.

That's right, you do it without trying, without understanding that's what you're doing even when told clearly and repeatedly.

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

I'll repeat it again:

I've had a couple of great discussions in this thread with people who took my views at face value and in good faith, rather than extrapolating them into something they aren't

In a discussion about transracialism, outlining the historical oppression of people of color does not undermine the highly apparent historical oppression of females. Talking about one does not mean I'm ignoring the other. So much extrapolation.