you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]lazy-summer-godSuper Gay 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don’t see this as bad or generalizing all trans people. This is calling out the rapey creepy activist wing that is by and large crossdressing people who thoughtlessly encourage surgical self-harm and are preoccupied with eliminating other people’s right to say no.

First part was valid and important to state. Calling them "self-mutilating crossdressers" was not necessary.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Whether it’s “necessary” seems to be beside the point. I don’t personally find this to be all that bad or harmful or a hill to die on. This group of people in large part historically identified as cross-dressers. It is often relevant that the people who think that wearing clothes that are culturally typical of the opposite sex (which many gay people have long since been doing without much fanfare or ascribing meaning to it) combined with taking exogenous cross-sex hormones, and consuming plastic surgery should give them any kind of moral high ground or legitimacy in policing the sexual orientation of others.

[–]lazy-summer-godSuper Gay 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Whether it’s “necessary” seems to be beside the point.

But the entire point of this discussion is "why can't we have our own community?". That's the answer.

What used to be is not true anymore. People who used to identify as that might not be around anymore. It doesn't cost much to show this level of respect and call them "trans" instead of something they consider a slur.