QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

So you're saying women's sports are for women because women created it and stuff. Most of the other factors could be controlled by weight and maybe some other factors. I imagine something like a score for every athlete depending on their physical capabilities. You could then sort athletes based into brackets based on these scores.

So yeah. Hubbard proves that the current rules are bad and need to be changed. That's not something we need to debate over. The more interesting question is: if actually fair rules were implemented: should trans women and cis men following these rules be allowed to compete against women? And should they be excluded from such a competition until these rules are found?

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Not sure if it is. The way I read the question it was setting up the premise that QT assumes these rules are fair. Then proposes the question if it would be fair for men to compete under the same rules. So to me it seems to be designed to spot hypocrisy in QT ranks and highlight those focusing on identity over competitive sports.

I mean so we're against the same thing. I don't think trans women competing in women's sports currently is fair. But I don't think it can never be. I also admit that I don't know enough about the subject to suggest an accurate ruleset. I don't have any formal education in sports and my only experience comes from HEMA.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

I just read the article you quoted. 1st the comparisons are between males with normal hormone levels and females with normal hormone levels. 2nd I've read through the whole article and doesn't say anywhere that no fair rules could possibly exist - even if your phrasing may make that seem different.

Tucker simply argues for exclusion until such rules are found. For both safety and the sake of competition. And who would have guessed that I don't disagree.

What do I bring to the conversation. Not a lot since I don't know if the rules are fair and won't judge on that front. My objective is simply to scout out what GC thinks - one which I have achieved. But the conversation brings a lot to me. By GCs reaction to my initial answer I can get a rough picture of how many are actually interested in fairness and safety while the other does not want males in women's sport full stop.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

And here is where we disagree. I make two assumptions for the sake of argument. 1) that the current rules are fair and that if they aren't 2) a fair set of rules exists and can be implemented. And under these assumptions I think it's fairly reasonable to let a man and a trans women compete against cis women as long as they follow the guidelines.

When you're talking about mixed sports you're always assuming that there is no possible set of rules to effectively level the playing field. Only under that assumption can you reach the conclusion you have for our little thought experiment.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

I mean we agree. There is not significant difference between men and trans women assuming equal levels of fitness, hormones etc. Where we disagree is your premise that no fair ruleset does exist to let trans women compete with cis women. It's a premise that I personally consider extremely unlikely. You could for example control the trans women's weight class based on how far they went through male puberty. Weight is directly related to strength. Other competitions may control for other factors to ensure fair competition.

trans identified male

eyeroll

Anyways. Even the article you send me states that hormone levels do not fully remove a competitive advantage. Fully is implies that at least a part of the advantage is removed. The other part could be controlled via other factors. Otherwise the source is clearly biased and I don't have the time to pick apart the examples since even for the trans women who lost you may alledge that they lost on purpose - like you did for Hubbard already.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

It seems like you're misunderstanding me. I'm assuming - for the sake of the argument - that the rules are fair and that if they are not that fair rules can be found. I should have made that clearer. I honestly don't know enough to judge wether the current set of rules are fair.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Honestly maybe I'm that rare QT person that's willing to bite that bullet. If eg a trans man could compete fairly with other cis men then why shouldn't he. And I think this should go both ways.

I'd say because testosterone /lack their of does a lot with your body and if you sorted ppl by T levels taking t wouldn't even give a competitive advantage. But that's where I don't know enough about sports to judge a competitors mindset

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

While still identifying as a man. Subtle difference. And yeah I don't get why someone would nuke their testo and take estrogen while doing so. Not doubting there may be a few counter examples because anecdotes are like fetishes. If you don't think there is someone like that there definitely is.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Okay. So the current rules aren't fair. If we established rules that were fair - eg the male would have to be In a lower weight class as well - and the playing fields were equal, would you allow males to compete with females?

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

So your point is that women need spaces away from men. Women's sports currently is such a place which would be taken away if you let trans women compete. Okay sure. But this isn't an argument exclusively to sports. We can apply the same logic to women's fitness centers, book clubs Bible study meetings or whatever. I agree that places like these should exist. Hell im helping to create such a space currently. I simply consider these secondary in a highly competitive environment where fairness should be the primary metric.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Do you think the difference between transwomen and men-who-take-hormones is semantics?

From a competitive standpoint in regards to physical sports? Yes.

So it would be the end of women's sports? Doesn't that sound kinda bad to you?

No, because it wouldn't remove any place where women could compete fairly. But it seems like you consider sport to be more than just that. If so then please explain to me what sport is to you.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

That's a different question from the originally proposed hypothetical thou. Which is why I consider it pretty lame. Because the answer is simply: if they are fair then the man should be able to compete. If the rules aren't then they shouldn't.

You say there are good reasons to have men's and women's sports categories. I don't see any beyond creating a competitive environment with a simple divider. If you have other good reasons I'm always open for input.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

What does fairness in competition have to do with revolutionary thought in a historical context? If you think the current rules aren't fair then work to get them changed and start changing them on the levels you can.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

How does that connect to my point thou?

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Your comment doesn't really make a ton of sense to me. What does me thinking that the hypothetical is far fetched to do with how someone identifies?

I'm not opening it to any male who wants an easy win. I'm opening it to anyone who meets the requirements for fair competition regardless of personal beliefs. Unless you consider sports to be about more than a fair competition - which I don't.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Isn't that just arguing semantics? Kinda lame tbh. I personally consider sports to be about fair competition not identity. So think anyone should be eligible to compete if the competition stays fair. So if a person fulfills all requirements to compete fairly why shouldn't they enter?

Would it still be "women's hard-fought-for sports leagues? No. But that doesn't matter from a purely competitive viewpoint.

QT: Can men compete in women's sports if they meet all the same requirements of transwomen? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Uhhm. Yeah sure. Not sure how or why a man would undertake these procedures and the whole thing seems kinda far fetched but sure. If someone meets the requirements to compete they can compete.

How can you tell if someone is expressing their actual gender identity? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Maybe I don't understand the question, but to me it sounds a lot like: how can I know wether or not someone is lying.

You can't tbh. At least not with 100% certainty. Best we can do is implement processes to evaluate someone's claim. But these evaluations should always be from the perspective of believing the claimant but helping them explore alternatives or feelings they may not have considered before.

In a public setting a think we have to take someone at their word until their actions either prove their word hollow or there is other evidence to demonstrate the same.

QT: How is not creepy/predatory for people with male bodies aka men to demand access to women's single sex spaces where women are going to naked like locker rooms? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 9 fun3 insightful - 8 fun4 insightful - 9 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't intend to reply tbh so I'll kepp it brief. Linking a GC blog that does not adress my singular point [trans men are an even easier front for predators than trans women]] so I doubt you mind I simply ignore it. No objection? Great.

I did not ask females to give males the benefit of the doubt. So I'm gonna ignore that as well. Much obliged. I'll stop being snarky. I tend to respond to comments one paragraph at a time since I'm on mobile. I read through the rest of your comment and noticed that you don't engage with my point. But I'll adress the last paragraph you wrote.

Transmen still have a lower rate of violence especially sexual violence than transwomen, because they are female.

I did not make any assumption to the contrary.

Many transmen do not pass at all, in fact I recommend that most of them continue to use female only spaces for their own safety. Their female socialization often gives the game away even if they do pass.

And now you proceed with the toupee fallacy. Let me give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're exceptionally great at spotting trans men. You're not most of the population in this case and your run of the mill predator would still have greater chance passing as a trans man than as a trans woman.

It's not fair or right to force men to share their single sex changing rooms with female bodied people

I agree in a kinda reverse sexism way, but I don't remember bringing that up. Sooo... Yeaaahhh...

QT: How is not creepy/predatory for people with male bodies aka men to demand access to women's single sex spaces where women are going to naked like locker rooms? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 5 insightful - 8 fun5 insightful - 7 fun6 insightful - 8 fun -  (0 children)

First of all if like to thank you for the question. Before I proceed with an answer id like to point out a few things, which may be reasons why you won't get an answer.

1st: Your question itself is loaded. By asking a negative "why is it not... ?" everyone who wants to answer will instantly have to start any point by defending a position your question assigns to them. A position they may not necessarily share. 2nd: In your question you equate male bodied = men instead of just using male. Here you're again injecting your own position into a question...

Nevermind. I just read the rest of your post and it continues in the same charged way by equating trans women's need for safety - which is the same desire as cis women's - to predatory behavior via the red flag bit. Maybe you can do better in your next post.

Do you find it a bit disturbing that destroying single sex spaces for women would directly benefit pedophiles and run of the mill sexual predators? Is it really worth it to make a fraction of a minority of the male population feel more "validated"?

I'm just gonna respond with a simple answer. Increased trans visibility will lead to decreased safety in strictly sex segregated spaces. Simply preventing trans women to enter these spaces wont change that. Why do I think so. Let's assume that spaces where strictly sex segregated. You know have trans men - which greatly increase in numbers atm using women's space. Let's assume a few of these pass - which is likely. You know have what looks like a cis man in a female space. In my opinion this would make it even easier for potential predators.

Same-sex sexual desire as the natural, but not actualised, default (criticism of sexuality) by SexualityCritical in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 9 insightful - 5 fun9 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

That's in interesting perspective and your reasoning is sound, but your premise that sexuality is mainly a social act is fallacious. Sex is a basic function of mammals and mainly instinct driven. This makes sex and sexuality a real phenomenon - wether you consider it one or not does not really matter. So unless you're willing to ascribe many other animals the mental ability to make the same choice your point fails at the premise.

Same-sex sexual desire as the natural, but not actualised, default (criticism of sexuality) by SexualityCritical in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I'm curious what you mean by "choose to be heterosexual" . If you mean that anyone can choose to cave to social pressure and play a heterosexual in the theater we call live - regardless of their own happiness or costs to their mental health, then I agree. You may also try to say, that sexuality is an actual choice. Then I disagree. I'm a sexual blob somewhere between ace and bi, so I don't get a lot of things about this kind of stuff, but talking to a few friends with more expressed sexualities I'm quite certain that sexuality is not a choice for most people.

Thoughts on this thread? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 6 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

A lot of text for an old argument refuted innumerable times. The mindsets between GID and BDDs are quite different.

BDD distorts the paitents self perception. They'll see something as either worse than it is or percieve it completely differently. To the point that they'll obsess about it [ocpd]. Eg the guy that's fine beeing a guy, but obsesses over his average sized dick.

GID does not change the paitents perception of the body. Same person, but with GID would be perfectly aware that their body is healthy and average and overall fine, but is not comfortable with their sex - male in this case.

I don't deny that you can suffer from both GID and BDD. The example of the objectively passing trans man obsessing over his small hand, which is actually in the average size range for males.

I'll now continue to point out some more things.

They get therapy and anti depressants and actual help.

ADs APs and therapy have been tried and did not help for GID patients.

Having dysmorphia about breasts or a vulva or a penis does not make it different. It does not make it necessary to help the person disfigure their healthy body even though they may be dysfunctionally sad about not getting to ruin healthy body parts.

I concur. To bad you're conflating GID and BDD for the sake of argument, but without context you make a great observation. Kudos.

There is no disease that is treated by an artificially induced endocrine disorder.

Just because something is unique does not make it wrong or flawed. Some issues only have one currently known solution that may seem unorthodox. That does not effect its efficacy in any way.

Causing disease to treat non-disease sadness is dumb and it cannot be framed in a way that makes it sensible.

The word disease does not make a ton of sense here. Last time I checked CGHRT [or mental illness for the sentence above] isn't infectious. Even when using illness I'm not sure what exactly you mean by it so id like to ask you to define disease in the context you used it. I'm not a native speaker so there may be some context I'm not aware of.

Both: What do you think causes people to develop sexual paraphilias? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for your response. I'm honestly happy, that you're able to find a way to deal with the damaging religous programming you have had to endure and sincerely hope you find happiness despite it.

I injected my own opinion into your comment and am sorry I did so. Im writing from my phone and have to memorize stuff and this happens sometimes. I personally wouldn't call the catholic stance pro sex either. For the reasons outlined before. It's to restrictive and controlling.

Regarding forgiveness. I'm not necessarily overlooking it as much as intentionally not considering it. The version of the catechism I had to memorize during my upbringing was quite specific that this "forgiveness" s is only granted to those that earnestly repent as in regret the sins they've committed and make an active commitment to improve in the future. Same with complete absolutions. Since these "sins" are controlling basic human instincts, especially in the case of homosexuality requiring a "sinner" to repent from them is cruel at best. So while I agree that redemption and forgiveness are core parts of catholic dogma the forgiveness of the rcc isn't as universal or loving as they like to portray outwards and imo just another way to control their members.

Thoughts on this thread? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 7 fun3 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

Functioning and not dying are two very different benchmarks at least the way I used it in context. I'm sorry for not making that clear.

If not dying is the baseline for health we should get rid of a lot of treatments, shouldn't we? Maybe you could elaborate what exactly you consider a healthy person and if mental illness should be treated.

Both: What do you think causes people to develop sexual paraphilias? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for the answer. Would you allow me to rephrase my question: Can you give me an example for a deviant sexual interest that isn't "full blown" ?

Both: What do you think causes people to develop sexual paraphilias? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Sure. I grew up on a catholic household on the 90s/ 2000s in Germany. Early in my life my parents joined a catholic cult called regnum christ and I went through their kids organization NET and ECYD and went to their private school for a bit. Given that the cult has papal approval I assumed that it would at least be a decent indicator of general catholic upbringing.

I got confronted with hell at an early age and it took me till recently to get rid of the fear programmed into me. This has greatly impacted my sexuality in general and definetly colors my perspective and I'm grateful for yours.

Roman Catholicism is very pro-sex & pro-sexual pleasure so long as sex & sexual pleasure occur in the context of heterosexual marriage and is done with procreation in mind.

I agree, but I don't consider this stance sex positive. To use a bad analogy - cuz im bad at good ones - it's comparable to beeing salad positive but only Caesar salad in a glass bowl without dressing. Also if you do it any other way you're gonna be roasted alive forever and make your best friend really sad.

Both Judaism and Islam seem similarly restrictive to me. I assume our bar for sex positive is set in a different place.

Thoughts on this thread? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 8 fun4 insightful - 7 fun5 insightful - 8 fun -  (0 children)

If the person needs the drug to function on the first place, then it's not. You could prescribe an alternative, but not every medication has one. So what would you do then. Either Co medicate to help with side effects or teach the paitent behaviors that help alleviate side effects. Given that the patient needs the drug to function, there are currently no known alternatives and co medication does not make a lot of sense in the long run teaching the patient methods to deal with their anger is the sensible solution. Also known as therapy.

Thoughts on this thread? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 8 fun4 insightful - 7 fun5 insightful - 8 fun -  (0 children)

Do you think anyone is saying T is a causative factor in this crime?

Yes. To quote from the post:

but I wonder how much Seti Yasin's brain and impulse control has been fried by T. T is known to increase aggression in women who use it. It ranges from irritability to rage.

What pisses me off is that this redacted will not be forced off of T. Considering she is violent, the first order of business would be to stop prescribing her testosterone and whatever cocktail of hormones and blockers she's on. Because MUH IDENTITY!, it cannot be done.

Both: What do you think causes people to develop sexual paraphilias? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

What do you mean by full blown paraphilia? I'm not talking about paraphilic disorders. A paraphilia is simply a deviant sexual interest. And like any interest could be triggered by all kinds of related things.

Both: What do you think causes people to develop sexual paraphilias? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

You raise an interesting point. I personally think that the people whose baseline is this high are quite rare and consider them extreme cases. I also think that the people amount of people that are close enough to the threshold to develop a kink without major external influences is quite low. Maybe 7 to 10% of the population.

While it's true that martyrdom portraits suffering as saintly its also explicitly not sexual. Even more most religions are explicitly anti sex and someone exposed to these stories may be more likely to repress their sexuality and feel guilty if they have sexual thoughts from these stories. Context is important when looking at these stories. But I'm more speaking from experience as someone who is kinky and grew up in a Christian household, than from any hard data or conversation I had with other kinksters on the topic.

Both: What do you think causes people to develop sexual paraphilias? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

While I agree that anecdotal evidence isn't great evidence there are some really common stories in the community. Eg the rigger tying up their stuffed animals.

but I don't think a biological predisposition would be enough to trigger a paraphilia all on its own

I mostly agree. But if we assume a genetic disposition exists and there is some threshold where any given paraphilia manifests, then some people may be so close to the threshold that seeing a related image [someone tied to a tree in the rigger/rope bunny example] may be enough to get them to explore their atypical sexual interests.

Both: What do you think causes people to develop sexual paraphilias? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Soooo. I don't agree with Blanchard one bit, so I'm not gonna go there. But since you mentioned sadism and masochism I'm gonna use that as my jumping off point. I've recently read "different loving" which is basically a collection of interviews with different people in the kink community. One of the common threads in these stories is, that their kinks showed signs in early childhood. I think that this makes it likely that there is at least some non environmental influence on paraphilia. Writing this I notice that this explanation is really vague and can be applied to almost anything, but oh well. Trauma can also cause paraphilias as a coping mechanism. Especially sexual trauma. Just look at r/Rapekink for a multitude of examples.

Why are paraphilias more common in men than in women. I agree that testosterone is likely a huge contributor here. There are a few studies showing that testosterone can affect libido, especially the way it works. That doesn't explain 20:1 but is probably part of it. Another part probably has to do with gender [the GC definition]. Women weren't allowed to pursue and discover their sexuality in many places until recently and in even more they still aren't allowed to. This is supported by a study finding that greater masculinity correlates with greater arousal by paraphilias in women only.

Women are also more often victims of sexual harassment which may lead to the greater disapproval rate of paraphilias among them. Interestingly a bigger study in a non clinical sample seems to show similar arousal of certain paraphilias between men and women, most courious masochism imo. But that's just something interesting I noticed.

Overall I consider this topic really interesting and think it deserves more research. AFAIK many aspects of women's sexuality are criminaly underresearched.

GC & QT: Where should we draw the line between human rights and entitlement? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal[M] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

This sub isn't meant to debate questions about race nor do we care for Alt right talking points here.

Ok, it's time to update the rules by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

If you're saying "trans people are delusional" or "you're delusional" I consider that an ad hominem. If you give a specific person for the sake of argument it's fine. If I say Margerie Taylor Greens belief in God is delusional thats fine. If you call everyone who beliefs in God delusional it's not. Attack beliefs not people and I don't care.

Ok, it's time to update the rules by grixit in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I actually would call that an ad hominem an treat it as such. Calling trans people delusional in general calls their rationality into question and tries to weaken their argument without addressing it.

Hey mods can we get a ruling on whether using the wrong pronouns for trans people counts as misgendering? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I personally disagree. I became a mod later and didn't write the rule with them but only enforced it when someone used as an ad hominem. We could expand the rule in that way. Things are moving fast right now but we'll find a solution.

QT/trans: What makes you want to be involved in the debate or advocating for trans rights? What would need to be achieved to make you stop? by peakingatthemoment in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

My original motivation was curiosity. I've always been curious about adverse opinions and just wanted to know what's up. Now I participate both to keep an eye for movements that may swap to my country and as a grindstone to evolve my own opinion.

What would it take for me to quit activism? The moment I don't have to worry about access to Healthcare beeing taken away and trans people become normalcy is the moment I'll stop. Given the recent bills in Alabama and Arkansas we're still far away from that. And some days I don't think it's achievable, but I won't stop fighting for it.

I'm nut sure if 15 years ago was better or not. I'm not old enough to really tell. But I think that more attention is a necessary way to normalcy. I also like to think that more attention gives others with a similar story to mine the courage to come out earlier. But I personally would greatly prefer invisibility.

Everything else by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Honestly that sound really awesome and interesting. I love antiques and cows [they're so wholesome in their own way.].

I hope the same for you :D

Everything else by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I'm in an inbound only team so it's not that bad for the agents. Still wouldn't recommend the job XD

Dunno. I have like a plan, I'm trying to go to uni and become a teacher in a vocational school. But It didn't work out so worked in psychiatry. Tried again, then started the apprenticeship as chimnesweep. Once I became a journeywoman I tried to get into uni again but failed. Had to get a new job and knowing that surgery would be coming up decided to switch jobs to something big and corporate, where nobody would miss me if I vanished for 6 weeks. Now I've got my team. Once I've got my certificate as a team coach I'll try getting into uni again. I don't expect to get in by this point but am curious where I'll end up then. XD

Yes I was surprised how many we were 😅

Everything else by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I have no issue with edgy jokes. I make them all the time. Just don't make it personally and everything is cool imo.

I currently work as coach in a contact center leading a team of 11. Before that i worked as a chimnesweep for 4 years and before that in psychiatry for 2 years.

If I had a billion dollars I'd probably quit my current job and pick up music again. With the other 999 millions I'd fund unions in Bangladesh and other countries currently overrun by capitalism.

Wrote a song last week. Not much of a crafting person rn.

I swear a lot. I try to cut back now that I'm in a leading position. But that just leads to me making more sarcastic jokes. So I'm at around 150 today.

QT: questions about transphobia (But gc feel free to add questions) by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Would be nice xS

QT: questions about transphobia (But gc feel free to add questions) by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

1) it's not.

2) a political opinion can be transphobic, or racist or homophobic. If you push to take away a gay couples right for adoption, that's homophobic and political. It really depends on the reasoning behind it.

3) The terms of a relationship are defined by the people in it. If the dude I'm seeing sees me as a woman then it's a straight relationship. If you wanna call it gay I'd say it's inaccurate, but whatever floats your boat.

4) misgendering is often used to attack trans people on a deeply personal level. But I like comparisons. If you cite the bell curve because of your worldview and science your're probably a racist. If you misgender trans folk intentionally because of your worldview you're probably a transphobe. 5) Gotta get em young you know. Can't build a "transsexual empire" if you don't start early. Edgy jokes aside. GD is an actual thing and early treatment gives better results overall. Not for everything [trans men beeing shorter and trans women may have issues with SRS later] sure. Secondly if we continue assuming that GD exists, then we should enable those who suffer from it to have access to the most effective treatment possible. If you don't think it exists, then you may want to provide another reason for why trans folk exist.

6) spaces and sports are different and should be evaluated differently. I'm not knowledgeable on sports so I won't comment. Spaces depend on the space. Bathrooms don't get safer for women if trans folk have to use the bathroom according to their sex, once you actually think about it and grant the premise that predators will dress as trans women to gain access to these spaces. Let me explain. If trans women had to use men's bathrooms it would follow that trans men should use women's bathrooms. Trans men don't pose a threat to women, because they are women, but a certain percentage passes as cis at a glance. Now you have male presenting people in women's bathrooms. So a cis predator wouldn't even have to try and present female to gain access to women's spaces. If you wanna argue that it's especially the trans women who pose a threat, then that would be transphobic. If you argue for 3rd spaces you probably aren't.

On the note of using these spaces pre transition. Don't. But if your medical system requires social transition before access to treatment that's a different story.

Prisons and similar are a different issue, but even there strict sex segregation isn't the solution if you have the safety of all vulnerable groups both during and after the sentence in mind. The latter is especially important if we want to use prsion as a chance to reform and not just as penalty.

7) as I've said before superstraight is actually quite welcome. If you give me a heads up that you don't wanna date me great. I don't get the comparison to hair color, height or race or whatever traits, but I can't intuit sexuality in general so that's most likely a me problem.

What I have an issue with is the current state of the movement. It's not the alledgedly wholesome movement it started out as. At least not anymore. There is a ton of transphobia running around. I also don't get the need to organize a movement. If you wanna write superstraight in your dating profile great. If you go full pride Mode like the oppressed majority you are and parade it on Twitter you're probably transphobic.

The discussion about "super" straight as opposed to something like cisgay or cisbi is also interesting, but useless. The only person it tells us anything about is the dude on tiktok who came up with it.

8) I think you found the most of the common points.

Both: What do you think of the new Super Straight movement? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Color me impressed. ;)

Both: What do you think of the new Super Straight movement? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 5 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

I'm fine with it. If you wanna find a new label so I know who isn't willing to have adult fun time with me I can only benefit. I wanted to check it out, but seems the sub got banned 3 hours ago. Shame. But I checked out the related subs and unsurprisingly the movement seems also riddled with actual transphobia. Shame really. Now it only tells me to avoid anyone adopting the label unless I'm craving some degradation.

Edit: it seems like the movement was more wholesome than I gave it credit for. If thats the case great. But it also kinda wants me to speed up my transition as long as I'm able to, given that some parties see this as a mass peaking event and I agree.

Edit for my edit: I have followed the developments for 2 days now and unfortunately seems like the movement has been taken over by actual transphobia. Lot of harmful stereotypes beeing spread and a general lack of respect can be observed. Especially in my own country which kinda has me worried now. I think I'll have to expedite my transition even more just in case this gets big enough to gun after my rights.

QT: Doesn't gender-identity only make sense for trans people? Why use it for non-trans people? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

You're right this is a debate sub. But most trans people don't take kindly to the comparisons you use, because they're often used to label trans people as mentally ill and in need of treatment, not rights. In addition of that they take a lot of effort to debunk, since they are so similar on a surface level. For schizophrenia you can look at the fact that there is a single case study of antpsychotics beeing used to "cure" a paitent of GID [Poland 1996] while there are multiple cases of schizophrenic trans people. interestingly these are mostly trans men, which is surprising given the spread of it in cis people.

The second is a pretty blatant false analogy. It ignores that trans age or whatever you want to call it is a new development without any precedent, I could find, before the 2010s. It's also not in any way medically documented in the same way gender dysphoria is.

Giving the benefit of the doubt I don't think you're arguing in bad faith, but you're using arguments that are often used to do so. Also the burden of proof is usually on the person claiming that something is. If you you say that these are comparable and are asked why you think so or are asked to proof it then you have to provide proof or, at the very least, your reasoning.

QT: Doesn't gender-identity only make sense for trans people? Why use it for non-trans people? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Even as a trans person I have to say I agree with you in the sense, that gender identity as in relation to the socially constructed gender roles doesn't make a lot of sense. Not just for cis but also for trans people. I personally use the term as the relationships to one's own sex. A mismatch or rejection triggers dysphoria - > urge to transition - > trans. A match does not do the same thing and you're cis. In that context a universally applied gender identity, sex identity would be more accurate, makes a lot sense. But I don't see similar definitions outside of trans medical and truscum places.

QT: Would a pure "theybie" who took a binary gender as an adult always be trans? by levoyageur718293 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Since trans sexuality is described between the relation of the self to the birth sex [I use gender identity from here] this example doesn't make a lot of sense. You can't raise someone non binary. That's just not how it works. You can raise them without gender roles as far as possible, but that will make them gnc at best. Gender identity is not something that can be taught.

GC: Humans are one of the few species with two sexes. There are species with four, thousands, or an unlimited number of sexes, which means "male" and "female" are social constructs and not universal categories that can be applied to other species by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

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

You're correct that bimodal sex isn't universal. But that does not make a social construct on its own. I think that male and female are socially constructed beyond their simple scientific meaning. But the basis, bimodal sex is not.

Maybe you can elaborate on the connection a bit more.

GC: Are there specific alternative treatments to SRS and HRT that have proven effective for successfully treating the most severe forms of gender dysphoria or transsexualism? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

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

Or you could just "morally mandate it [the problem of transsexualism] out of existence"

-the transexual empire, Janice Raymond.

QT: When you came out, did you write a coming-out statement, offline or online? by ISaidWhatISaid in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't. I talked to those who needed to know. The rest just had to accept it or get lost.

QT, what makes recognition of your identity a right you are owed? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

What are rights? That's a good question. Rights when looked at from a slightly cynical angle are just Perks that a powerful part of a society decided to grant or withhold from certain people. So is anyone entitled to any right? Not really. But I think that's not what you're getting at with this question.

From a less cynical perspective rights are things society agrees to be beneficial for itself. That's how new rights get introduced. Society either adapts or risks collapse. Recently we've entered a time were one of the dominant forces for the introduction of new rights is the idea of equality. Trans people can easily argue that they want to be treated like any other normal person. Normal in this case beeing cis. Because why should they be treated differently, for a natural 1 rolled at their birth. This honestly extends to everyone. Why should anyone be treated worse in language for the circumstances of their birth?

I don't agree with everything that parts of the trans community have advocated or done in favor of this, but I don't think that the overall sentiment is wrong.

QT: How do we determine who is identifying as trans in bad faith under self-identification? by comradeconradical in GCdebatesQT

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

I have a question. I might make it a post later, but I'm just curious. So your saying you shouldn't allow males in female spaces. Makes sense. Assuming you believe that trans women are male and thus men, that would also extend to trans men who are female and thus women. So trans men should have access to female spaces. Assuming transition is still an option for us trans people, doesn't this create the issue of what at least physically is a man in women's bathrooms? Since trans men pass easier than trans women this would give male predators the option to pose as trans men to invade all female spaces that don't check the id beforehand.

Sure you would be able to deal with them after the fact, but the topic is prevention not persecution.

QT: a “what if” for you by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

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

Not a lot would change. At least for the part of trans people that wants to be invisible in language. Let's assume there was group of ppl wearing red overalls and they [wearing purple ones] wanted to have a red one as well to blend in. If that group suddenly decided to dye their overalls green nothing would change except that they want a green overall now. Red would just become the new purple.

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

I'm not arguing about the legalities of the case. My only gripe with it is the following.

Even in cases involving teenagers under 18 doctors may need to consult the courts for authorisation for medical intervention

Im opposed to having courts and thus a political system involved in medical treatment on a practical basis. Not a legal one. So I don't see how knowing the intrecacies of these laws would change that stance. My issue isn't with the safeguarding itself. I actually agree that it is necessary. I just don't think that involving the courts in these cases has additional benefits compared to a solution within the nhs.

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

Anyways. As I have said the terms gatekeeping and safeguarding describe the same thing: rules that let those in who need it and keep those out who don't. I don't like arguing over semantics, but I think the term gatekeeping is more applicable in this situation, because getting judges involved any time another trans child below 16 seeks treatment just adds another imo unessecsry step. Because what data are these judges going to rely on. They aren't experts in the field and likely don't have the time do an in depth screening. I'm assuming they'll ask actual psychologists. If theyre going to ask them anyway you can just cut out the middle man. I have proposed this in my previous post, since I think that some gatekeeping or safeguarding is necessary. Getting courts involved just doesn't give any significant benefits, besides added costs and a dependency on the political climate in the UK. I'm not as you think, in favor of putting drugs for off label use in a public place so those who want to get access to it. I actually never said anything remotely like that. So that whole last paragraph actually addresses none of my concerns.

Also "off label" doesn't mean a lot. It just means that the manufacturer hasn't paid to test their medication for this use case in this country. In my country off Label drugs [cytotec] are given during child birth, heck all of the ones im currently using are beeing prescribed off label. It's not the big "experiment on harmless children" you make it out to be.

Honestly writing my response I feel like you're misunderstanding the issue I have with the topic. It's not that there was a trial. Its not the court mandated that safeguarding be done. It's the kind of gatekeeping that's beeing implemented, which I take issues with. Something your entire response unfortunately doesn't adress. I can gather from it that you seem to be opposed to children transitioning in any capacity, which I completely disagree with. There is no reasonable assumption that some kids wouldn't benefit from transition and that the issues of screening for them can't be solved in some capacity.

GC: Why are penises, testes, etc considered strictly male organs, and vaginas, uteruses, etc strictly female organs? What's wrong with the view that women have penises, etc too and can produce sperm, or that men have vaginas, uteruses, etc too and can get pregnant? by BubblyBrush in GCdebatesQT

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

That's a really interesting article. I have applied for a study on the subject last year and some, but not all, of the concerns listed there where in the paper that informs you about the potential risk. Thou there was one mistake she made regarding AAs in transwomen. Thank for sharing

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

What exactly makes you thin that? My knowledge is a bit rusty since Its been a few years since I actively worked with children, but I'm still pretty knowledgeable about the basics of adolescent development.

QT/Transmed: Where does gender (identity and roles) come from? by DistantGlimmer in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

So. I think it's important to distinguish gender identity to gender roles.

Let's start with gender roles. Where do they come from?

I believe it's a mixture of nature and nurture. Women aren't as strong as men and are way less expandable from a survival standpoint. This means that in a society it would make sense to safeguard women, not sending them into wars, so a society can bounce back from loosing a war. Now depending on how society deals with this premise it can go one of two ways. In societies where strength is dominant men will be as well. In a society where wisdom is dominant woman can be, since their wisdom is less likely to be lost in war or battle.

Men becoming more dominant would then lead to women becoming more oppressed, since men want to hold onto their power. And what the easiest way to achieve that? Keep them both weak and stupid. Gender roles, roles one getts assigned by society based on sex, are one of the most important tools to keep men in power.

I'm somewhat transmed, so gender identity to me is just the identification with the other sex. What causes this? I have no idea. I have seen the hypothesis of shorter androgen receptors in trans women's brains floating around, but the studies to me seem inconclusive and I don't see a way to study this in an ethical way. So I'm open to any convincing evidence. For now, Im 80% positive it exists, but I don't know why.

Gender roles are forced on us every day. Following them stems Imo from a desire to fit in. Not many people would choose the outgroup, since it's a hassle and the immediate consequences of doing so are social. We're social animals after all.

Trans people follow the same principle, we're people after all, plus the added desire of wanting to be the other sex. If you want to be something, you'll try your best to become that, however impossible it may seem thus gender roles become a tool that helps achieving that. I don't think many people are conscious about why they do it, since they haven't thought about it a lot.

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

Honestly I started reading the document, but I can't be bothered to read pages of laws that don't apply to the discussion and are from a country I particularly care about. If you want to point me to any specific paragraphs from the law then I'd be much obliged.im aware of the UN convention however. I think the most relevant articles are 12, and 24. Thou I'd argue that 24 can be used to argue both in favor as well as in opposition of gatekeeping. This leaves us with 12 which is inconclusive as well given that it only states that the child's interests and opinion should be considered in any matter regarding the child. Which could be used to argue in favor of the clinics method, but since I don't agree with them I won't do that. If I have overlooked anything, then feel free to point that out.

Maybe you should look into the process of name change in Germany, which I used for comparison and follows exactly this process and still has the issues I outlined, since it involves judges who, beeing part of the political system - beeing appointed by the politician - does that to you - won't necessarily decide in the patients best interests.

I don't see how divorce or immigration are more applicable examples than the one I gave. A child transitioning isn't a family matter.

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

Wether you call it gatekeeping or protection its goal is the sale thing. Keeping minors who don't need to transition away from transition. The only difference here is perspective. Wether you argue from the side of those that have to transition aka transsexuals, or those who desist and thus would be protected by the added burocracy. I could argue your points in reverse for trans kids, but I think you can easily enough imagine that yourself. So regardless of wether you call it gatekeeping or protection, we both agree that some is necessary. Our biggest difference seems to be the kind oand amount of bureaucracy added to the process. Still waiting for any points that adress my concerns regarding this.

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Hey mate. Please try to keep your debates factual and engage points not people. Ad hominem isn't a great look.

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

Actually a lot more then you might think. Both involve a court deciding something related to our lives. And so I expect the system to have the same issues I lined out in my previous post.

What exactly is that therapy meant to accomplish and why would you need lots of it? Also yes. I believe that kids can be trans, as in dysphoric and wanting to transition. Sure they aren't trans men or women, but they can be as transsexual.

Those are some big allegations. Why would you force someone to transition as punishment? What are they supposed to learn from that?

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

I didn't assume that judges were making any decisions. I agree that some gatekeeping is necessary when talking about minors. My concern is more about the kind of gatekeeping beeing done here. Involving judges just doesn't have any tangible benefit over getting a recommendation by an actual expert in the field. Heck make these a few and regulate who gets to write these. I simply expect more issues to come out from having judges make these decisions, as I laid out, then when not involving them. So I agree with the spirit of the ruling but not the letter.

GC: Do you genuinely desire to have more trans men in public positions (i.e. acting, politics)? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

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

I'm sorry you had to go through that and that you don't feel welcome here. All we ask is for is that you're more mindfull in the way you word your opinios, especially when making blanket statements.

QT: Why are people not allowed to feel disappointed when someone transitions? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

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

Maybe it's easier for me since I have never stopped thinking these thoughts and my "role model" if you can call it that, never really changed. But I agree that there is no objective understanding here. Internal stuff like motivation will always be subjective.

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

I don't doubt that they are judges with experience in the UK. It's the same in Germany. All of the judges who deal with this stuff have experience in the field. This does not mean that they don't treat trans people vastly different. Getting a name change in Bavaria is a nightmare due to judges handling the cases beeing sexist as fuck. In more liberal states like Hamburg or Berlin it's really simple, maybe even to simple.

GC: Do you genuinely desire to have more trans men in public positions (i.e. acting, politics)? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal[M] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Please keep in mind that this sub is for both QT and GC users to debate. This requires some respect for our believes, so blanket calling a side delusional doesn't fly here.

GC: Do you genuinely desire to have more trans men in public positions (i.e. acting, politics)? by Genderbender in GCdebatesQT

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

Cuz all trans men are delusional? Or isn't that the logical conclusion from your statement?

QT: Why are people not allowed to feel disappointed when someone transitions? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

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

My transition isn't motivated by gender though. When I first wanted to transition I was still naive enough to assume that gender didn't matter.

QT: Why are people not allowed to feel disappointed when someone transitions? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

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

Yes. Absolutely.

QT: Why are people not allowed to feel disappointed when someone transitions? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

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

The thing is, that its not a sexist society that makes me want to transition. Not sure if you know the WEBTOON fluidum. Even if we lived in a society like that, I'd still want to transition [if the body thing wasn't in that comic]

Both: How do you feel about the High Court's decision in the Keira Bell case? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

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

I'm sad and angry. While puberty blockers are a sensitive topic I don't think the courts should get involved in medical decisions. Judges don't have the expertise to make that decision. This will lead to judges either making decisions for political reasons, thus preventing treatment for those who need it or theyll leave the decision to an expert opinion which is most likely positive but costly for the paitent.

This means that transition is likely to be gatekept by either location [and thus the deciding judge] or money. A situation we have with name changes in my country.

QT: Why are people not allowed to feel disappointed when someone transitions? by questioningtw in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's complicated. My sentiment toward my old self is that he is dead. Shouldn't have existed in the first place and only came to be because a little kid was too afraid to speak up.

I can understand why someone I knew before I transitioned would be disappointed. But I don't care and if they express that feeling towards me, then yes I am offended. My life has nothing to do with you and I don't owe you any say in it. Because you obviously don't know me well enough that you should. That beeing said I don't think that I have changed that much. Or at least not more than cis people change over the years. Keep in mind that that my perspective on my transition.

In general I think it's okay to feel what you feel. But before you express those feelings to someone you might want to ask yourself if you're actually close enough to the person who wants to transition to have any say in it.

Ashton Challenor, the boy who disappeared - trans identified Aimee Challenor by emptiedriver in GCdebatesQT

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

Sure. And that's the issue. From her fetish we can not make any assumptions about her policies. Fetishists aren't alike.

Ashton Challenor, the boy who disappeared - trans identified Aimee Challenor by emptiedriver in GCdebatesQT

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

Maybe and maybe. You can not tell the difference from the outside. And thats the point both of these might happen. I don't see how "pretending" to be trans would grant you greater legitimacy outside of very specific circles. Maybe the US is different there, but from what I read in trans circles acceptance is generally low outside a few liberal areas.

Ashton Challenor, the boy who disappeared - trans identified Aimee Challenor by emptiedriver in GCdebatesQT

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

It's character assassination because her fetishes don't qualify or disqualify as a leader on their own. Her actions regarding her father [thanks for the comers who provided me with additional info] did, but that's not what the article devoted most of its length to. So yeah I call that character assassination.

Its quite simple to untangle them. Trans rights are one topic, how communitys, any communitys deal with fetishists is another. I

I don't think going no true Scotsman is a valid way of thinking. So I won't argue that someone is or isn't trans based on their fetishes or other characteristics that I might find disturbing. So I assume she is trans but also into age play.

I think the reason I and maybe other people don't worry about it as much is that age play and infantilization itself isn't an issue. Pedophilia is, and while her boyfriend might be into that i at least haven't seen any evidence that she has that particular paraphilia. And yes these two are different.

Personally i think that it's likely that she was abused as a child which might have something to do with her fetish, kinda the way that rape victims can develop a rape kink. Wether or not she is trans because of the abuse is not something anyone, besides her therapist, can actually answer.

Why isn't that something that trans rights advocates are worried over unless they want to advocate for pedophilic fetishists as well?

This is the main reason why I think that you can't really conflate these two topics, because the topic should be explored more nuanced than that. Do I think that trans people with like her deserve the same rights as any trans person on the planet? Yes. Does that mean that avocation for Trans people and infantilization fetishists is the same? Nope.

Ashton Challenor, the boy who disappeared - trans identified Aimee Challenor by emptiedriver in GCdebatesQT

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

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. Yes the lines fall together here and you can argue both trans rights and paraphilia at the same time.

But these are still different topics and should be treated as such. Treating them as the same topic or anything more then incidentally connected is fallacious at best.

So her paraphernalia and her beeing trans - and thus a trans rights advocate - should be separated for the sake of nuanced discussion even if they are intertwined in the person.

I personally consider age play between adults unproblematisch. I dont like it, quite the contrary, especially infantilization, but as long as it stays between adults it's unproblematic.

Ashton Challenor, the boy who disappeared - trans identified Aimee Challenor by emptiedriver in GCdebatesQT

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

In our current society it's definitely not a smart move to be open about your fetish while running for any public office. Fetish shaming is still ubiquitous, which is the reason why the community is really tight knit and most sites actively warn about posting identifying pictures. I think that that's wrong, because what gets doesn't have any impact on how well you can do other stuff.

That's honestly new information to me. Thanks for bringing it up.

Ashton Challenor, the boy who disappeared - trans identified Aimee Challenor by emptiedriver in GCdebatesQT

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

Auto correction. paraphilia. Im on my phone and sometimes it just defaults to my native language.

I don't consider it to be any more intertwined with trans rights, than with gay rights. These are issues that coexist. And they don't need to be argued or solved together. Quite the contrary. I think these should be discussed speratly as the lines don't fall together.

QT: What happens when another culture's idea of gender does not align with your idea of gender? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Sure. I think it falls on the nby to be both lenient and open about their identity and on the other culture to be open about it. Running around people who never heard it l to understand the concept would just be frustrating

QT: What happens when another culture's idea of gender does not align with your idea of gender? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

I don't belive in objective morality. The question basically comes down to how much a culture has to respect someone who is visiting it.but honestly the rule of thump for these cases is simple.

The culture should try to ease a foreigner inside of the culture where possible, but respect their boundaries when told. Let's assume a group of Japanese ambassadors visited France during the end of Japanese isolation. While France should show them the way around, help them to fit in where possible and ask them to respect their norms the same goes the other way around. They should not ask these samurai to part with their swords during the visit for example, since these are personal symbols whose significance the French just can not understand.

Ashton Challenor, the boy who disappeared - trans identified Aimee Challenor by emptiedriver in GCdebatesQT

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

I personally consider pedophilia a paraphernalia not a sexual orientation. But I think that there is a difference between diddeling kids and role-playing your fetish with a consenting adult. This goes for many fetishes.

I don't think forced therapy works. If someone said that they can't live out their paraphilic fantasies in play I'd suggest they see a therapist. The whole topic is complicated and you're navigating a fine line between what is okay and what's not.

Ashton Challenor, the boy who disappeared - trans identified Aimee Challenor by emptiedriver in GCdebatesQT

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

So. Reading through this character assassination I have two things to say.

1) she should have informed the party once she was aware of what her father did. It seems like she didn't do that and that's a big failure on her part.

2) Bringing up her fetishes is a completely different topic. I don't think these belong into a piece on her political failings. But maybe that's coming from someone heavily involved in some kink communities.

QT: What happens when another culture's idea of gender does not align with your idea of gender? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

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

Other cultures do their thing. There is nothing inherently bad about that. But that culture would face the same problem that western societies face. I'm a woman. Not a third gender created for me by someone else. So if someone from that culture would label me kathoey then I'm sorry but they are wrong. And id probably tell them that. If someone else is fine with that, then great but I'm not.

Its similar with nbys. If you call a female nby a woman because that's what culture assigns based on their appearance, then you're wrong.

Gender is, and that much GC and I agree, always an issue as soon as it's assigned.

GC: What is the best or most important thing trans people or transsexuals can do to help you? by peakingatthemoment in GCdebatesQT

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

Out yourself to your friends.should I give them my medical history? Mental health checks? Criminal record as well?

So I came across this online, comparing trans ideology and some of the go to comments to religion. Just thought it was interesting. May be bothersome, if I’m being honest. by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

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

I don't expect her to answer for the GC movement. Just for how parrales to religion can be found in GC as well as QT. For that I quoted Sheila Jeffreys.

I wasn't aware Yaniv had enough influence to speak infront of legislative bodies? Sorry but Jeffreys isn't anyone.

What does the failure of TRAs to change the Gender Recognition Act mean for the future of self-ID? Could things be changing? by peakingatthemoment in GCdebatesQT

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

That's actually Suprisingly low. I must have missed that part.

2k is what it is in my country to get stuff changed.

The legitimacy or illegitimacy of self-identification as the opposite sex (more colloquially but incorrectly known as "gender identity") aside, distinguishing between the sexes is justified, but distinguishing between trans-women & men isn't by SnowAssMan in GCdebatesQT

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

Not sure where you got the "not recommended for infant consumption" part from. No article I can find on the subject mentions that. Actually quite the opposite.

Maybe we're talking different cases? Mine is from. 2018. Best article is in the NYT. Also male nipple discharge may not be the best term to Google this topic.

What does the failure of TRAs to change the Gender Recognition Act mean for the future of self-ID? Could things be changing? by peakingatthemoment in GCdebatesQT

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

I don't know how much the costs were slashed. If it was significant, so that it's affordable for young people, then Its something. But somehow I doubt it. Changing a document shouldn't cost 2k or more.

QT but all can comment - How would you refute the argument that The phrase "transwomen are women" presupposes that there is a cultural role for women to fill? by DistantGlimmer in GCdebatesQT

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

That's exactly my point. Patterns exist. So they can be used for passing regardless of expectations.

So I came across this online, comparing trans ideology and some of the go to comments to religion. Just thought it was interesting. May be bothersome, if I’m being honest. by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

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

Really? Even if that person is influencial enough to speak infront of legislative bodies? I'm not quoting some random Twitter argument here.

I would like to bring receipts for the therapy thing, but the GC subreddits got deleted, so I'm not sure where to get them. And ovarit isn't a website I visit regularly. Maybe my impression of the GC movement is tainted by the old GCdebatesQT crowd. But having been there for I think 3 years I doubt it.

So I came across this online, comparing trans ideology and some of the go to comments to religion. Just thought it was interesting. May be bothersome, if I’m being honest. by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

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

I'm not referring to Sloane. I'm referring to to the GC movement and how parallels to religion can be drawn based on GC speeches as well. My comment made that quite clear.

If you want receipts look up Sheila Jeffrey's.

The legitimacy or illegitimacy of self-identification as the opposite sex (more colloquially but incorrectly known as "gender identity") aside, distinguishing between the sexes is justified, but distinguishing between trans-women & men isn't by SnowAssMan in GCdebatesQT

[–]Porcelain_Quetzal 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

It's not fallacious. I don't expect you to know of the case where a trans woman was able to breast feed [after a strict hormone regiment, but that's to be expected]. But Id expect you to be curious and Google search, before calling bullshit.

QT but all can comment - How would you refute the argument that The phrase "transwomen are women" presupposes that there is a cultural role for women to fill? by DistantGlimmer in GCdebatesQT

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

Thanks. That was really helpful.

I think the core of my confusion was a misunderstanding of the word stereotype. In my mind a stereotype is something that is enforced. Where you expect everyone to be like that. Things that exist without expectation are patterns. The voice example fits great here. The voice thing is a pattern. Just because deep female voices are rare compared to higher ones. Vice versa for males.

The stereotype in media, that certain people sound a certain way doesn't really help. But I hope you understand what I'm getting at.

Tbese patterns would, at least imo still exist in a post gender world. Though we may not now what exactly these patterns would look like.

QT but all can comment - How would you refute the argument that The phrase "transwomen are women" presupposes that there is a cultural role for women to fill? by DistantGlimmer in GCdebatesQT

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

Agreed. As I said. I doubt the patterns would be the same. But I'm more or less certain theyll exist. And if they do, then they can be used for passing. Not to mention the obvious biological differences between male and female which will stay the same.