Are these people serious?

submitted by pacmanla from self.LGBDropTheT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 28 insightful - 9 fun28 insightful - 8 fun29 insightful - 9 fun -  (2 children)

    And those "genital fetishists" in countries where gays and lesbians are executed by law - are just loving extreme and are masochists, tought by homophobic societies to "prefer" outlawed genitals.

    [–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 23 insightful - 2 fun23 insightful - 1 fun24 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Yes this is one thing that especially bothers me. The attitude that to be gay or bisexual affords you privilege is an attitude that can only exist in the West, if anywhere, and only in limited pockets of the West. I can’t take anyone seriously who acts like its some sort of universal truth that being gay is easy and accepted and being trans means you’re a vulnerable minority. In fact I think most people in the world likely don’t even know that transsexualism is a thing, and certainly not transgenderism, a concept that is reliant on linguistic gymnastics that don’t exist in most languages.

    Again, if there any Euro-ethnocentrism, it’s in transgenderism and specifically the heterosexual variety. And when you look at the parts of the world where only homosexual transsexualism is present/abundant, each type it’s clear they it’s something only for men and that transsexualism affords better treatment than just before a homosexual man.

    I would love to see any counter-examples. Are there even examples of female trans people outside of the West? I never hear about them.

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

    There have definitely been women who take the role of men both in history and currently but it's almost always more about survival in a highly patriarchal society; women who wanted to attain certain professions or roles that were considered "only for men".

    I agree about the other cultures' "third genders" basically always just being HSTS. India's hijra, Thailand's kathoey(ladyboys), the Muxes in Mexico (and iirc that was only one small portion of Mexico, not the whole country), they're always just HSTS. From a biological perspective, society can "afford" to have men not play the male role in reproduction (hell, the men who do want to reproduce would probably prefer it that way), but women are basically never "allowed" to opt out of being seen as the baby makers.

    ALSO, the cultures that have "third gender" are typically the MORE patriarchal ones, because they have a stricter (heteronormative) definition of how "men" are "supposed" to act and as such men who don't act that way are labeled "non men". It's both (a) not progressive at all and (b) not the same thing as trans in Western culture, because trans in Western culture demand to be considered literally the sex they identify as, whereas the whole point of third genders was letting them be a third thing.
    Basically my rebuttal to those "wow muh noble savage much enlightened non western cultures have third genders!" arguments is "Yeah, other cultures have a word that means 'f#ggot' or 's#ssy'. It's not that progressive, nor does it make trans women literally women".