LGB refutation of TQ+, Part 2: Going on the Offense

submitted by PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust from (self.LGBDropTheT)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Taln_Reich 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Well, their explanation is, that they are using the cultural gender stereotypes in order to communicate their gender identity to the outside, in the timespan before their transition has progressed far enough that they don't need to rely on said stereotypes to be recognized as their gender.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I'd be interested in your counterargument here, Taln. This is what occurs to me:

  • It is inescapably about gender... because gender is the very basis of their "identity" in the first place. So how does the explanation "I don't even believe in gender, and intend to drop the gender stereotypes... as soon as people start applying them to me by default" make sense? The only thing at issue here is whether the trans person solicits being gendered versus being gendered automatically. What is their gender identity made of, after all? The "proof" that they're not "of their assigned gender"? Such things as "I like pink, and wearing makeup, and cutesy stuff, so I must be a woman". In other words... cultural gender stereotypes. There's no getting away from them, for those who buy into the trans ideology. Even if its adherents would like to suggest otherwise.
  • Since transwomen virtually never "pass", at what point do they stop relying on cultural gender stereotypes to signal that, while obviously men, they're somehow "really" women?
  • Even if this explanation was credible, how is using stereotypes at all-- thereby reinforcing/perpetuating them-- OK? If a white person "identifies" as black, and-- until their "racial transition" has progressed far enough for them to "pass"-- uses racial stereotypes to communicate their "true self", would that be acceptable? Or would it be offensive and harmful, regardless of whether the stereotypes were being used temporarily or permanently?

[–]Taln_Reich 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It is inescapably about gender... because gender is the very basis of their "identity" in the first place. So how does the explanation "I don't even believe in gender, and intend to drop the gender stereotypes... as soon as people start applying them to me by default" make sense? The only thing at issue here is whether the trans person solicits being gendered versus being gendered automatically. What is their gender identity made of, after all? The "proof" that they're not "of their assigned gender"? Such things as "I like pink, and wearing makeup, and cutesy stuff, so I must be a woman". In other words... cultural gender stereotypes. There's no getting away from them, for those who buy into the trans ideology. Even if its adherents would like to suggest otherwise.

The transdgender people I have talked to have been very insistent on seperating gender role and gender identity. Essentially, it's the other way around to how you made it out. As in, gender identity is not based on gender role, but gender role (as well as defiance thereof) is based on gender identity. Gender identity itself in turn relates how the person in question feels about their physical sexed anatomy (e.g. trans women being distressed at their lack of breasts, masculine facial features, beard growth and presence of penis, trans men being distressed at their presence of breasts, lack of penis, etc. with this distress being called "gender dysphoria" ), completly independent of gender role/gender expression. The descriptions that put it down to gender role/gender expression are simply oversimplistic. Essentially, a person with female birth sex, that loves wearing typical feminine clothing, loves cutesy stuff and has stereotypical feminine hobbys would still be a valid trans men (FtM) if this person felt distress over their female anatomical features (equivalent for trans women, so a person with male birth sex that is into tradionally masculine things would still be a valid trans women if they felt distress over their male anatomical features).

Since transwomen virtually never "pass", at what point do they stop relying on cultural gender stereotypes to signal that, while obviously men, they're somehow "really" women?

essentially, it's a balancing act. The further along the transition they are, the more the physical changes to the body the signaling of the gender identity, the less the person has to rely on cultural cues to be perceived as the gender they identify as. (Also, in regards to "virtually never pass", I want to bring up the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey https://www.transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/USTS-Full-Report-FINAL.PDF , in particular fig. 4.15, with the question "How often people could tell they were transgender without being told" which for transgender women is 19% "always/most of the time", 35% "sometimes" and 47% "Rarely/never")

Even if this explanation was credible, how is using stereotypes at all-- thereby reinforcing/perpetuating them-- OK? If a white person "identifies" as black, and-- until their "racial transition" has progressed far enough for them to "pass"-- uses racial stereotypes to communicate their "true self", would that be acceptable? Or would it be offensive and harmful, regardless of whether the stereotypes were being used temporarily or permanently?

a. ) pretty much no one consideras "transracial" to be a real thing, so argueing this is moot.

b.) the stereotypes utilized by transgender people to signal their gender identity until they are sufficently transitioned to not rely on this any longer are merely relating to external appearance, e.g. gendered clothing and applying makeup in ways to accentuate the facial features that fit the gender identity, while disaccenuating those that don't. So, for your "white dude that identifies as black dude"-example, that would essentially amount to said trans-black person styling their hair into an afro, as there is gendered clothing but not racialized one. Sure, there are people who would scream cultural appropiation about that, but I don't agree that "white person with afro hair" is somehow "offensive" or "harmfull".

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

pretty much no one consideras "transracial" to be a real thing, so argueing this is moot.

It's hypocritical to consider "transgender" to be a "real" thing but not "transracial". TQs say a man "identifying" as a woman is a woman because he "identifies" as such. Either "identifying" as something makes you that thing, or it doesn't. If it does, "transracial" should be considered a thing. Someone white "identifying" as black would have to be legally seen as black, but the reason they aren't is because trans right activists and TQs are hypocrites. They understand "identifying" as another race doesn't make you that race even if you try hard to medically or surgically change skin color. They should understand no matter how many times someone has surgery or takes hormones, they can not say they are another sex either. Either "transracial" and "transgender" are real things, or "transgender" and "transracial" are not real things

It's also not "birth sex". It's sex. 🙃

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

It's hypocritical to consider "transgender" to be a "real" thing but not "transracial". TQs say a man "identifying" as a woman is a woman because he "identifies" as such. Either "identifying" as something makes you that thing, or it doesn't. If it does, "transracial" should be considered a thing. Someone white "identifying" as black would have to be legally seen as black, but the reason they aren't is because trans right activists and TQs are hypocrites. They understand "identifying" as another race doesn't make you that race even if you try hard to medically or surgically change skin color. They should understand no matter how many times someone has surgery or takes hormones, they can not say they are another sex either. Either "transracial" and "transgender" are real things, or "transgender" and "transracial" are not real things

(Note: I'm argueing from the transmedicalist/truscum position)

This completly ignores what transgender people mean when they say "I identify as a man/as a woman". It means that the person in question is distressed at their female/male physical sexed characteristics, strongly desiring to have male/female ones instead (this being called gender dysphoria). It has nothing to do with gender roles or gender conformity. There is no such thing as "racial dysphoria", as in, the person being distressed at their physical ethnic characteristics, it is all about the cultural roles of the ethnicity in question. So, a transgender person in a world without gender based stereotypes/gender roles would still be a transgender person (as in: still distressed about their physical sexed characteristics), a transracial person would have nothing to base their "identification" on. The poster child of "transracial", Nkechi Amare Diallo (formerly known as Rachel Dolezal) is less comparable to a transgender person, the gender equivalnet would be more a gender non-conforming person who pretends to be the other sex in order to follow the gender role of the other gender.

It's also not "birth sex". It's sex. 🙃

If sex doesn't change (your position) than birth sex is the exact same as sex, meaning my use of the term is merely unnecessary specific. If sex does change by medical transitioning (which, again, some people do claim) it is a necessary specification. I'd rather be unnecessarily specific than fail to be necessarily specific.