sorted by:
new
hottopinsightfulfun

Canadian Bar Association Demands "No Exception" To Male Transfers to Women's prisons by VioletRemi in GenderCritical

[–]VioletRemi[S] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The parts about "no exceptions" and "ignoring safety concerns" are the most crazy. They are basically saying "even if it is just someone right now just self-identified - and who is very dangerous to women, ignore that and put women at risk".

Also, why they have such fixation on "do not record sex of inmates at all" - but what about healthcare at least? Not speaking about statistics, etc...

Canadian Bar Association Demands "No Exception" To Male Transfers to Women's prisons by VioletRemi in GenderCritical

[–]VioletRemi[S] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's insanity. Why do they hate women so much?

Archieved version: https://archive.is/ybTMU

Canadian Bar Association Demands "No Exception" To Male Transfers to Women's prisons

by VioletRemi to /s/GenderCritical from reduxx.info

Do individuals with CAIS have female sex organs? Or do they have male sex organs? by [deleted] in GenderCritical

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

10 minutes is not 2 seconds.

just because they "identify" as women or "pass as" women on the outside.

They don't identify as women. In most cases they do not even know that they have such condition. And you will never know - unless they say it to you.

Why everything is an agenda to you?

And anyways, in other your answers (including ones to me) you shown complete ignorance and no knowledge about situation, yet insisted on calling those people with slurs and asking to imprison or kill them alltogether, even thought they are an extremely minority among people, who you would never even know about their condition if they will not say it to you, with just few cases per tens of millions of people. Yet, you hate them for some reason and speak only about them, instead of focusing on the real argumen of "manly looking men declaring to be women".

It is not a discussion sub. I'll stop responding to you from now on.

"CAIS" (Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) proves that Transgenderism is Real" by Kai_Decadence in GenderCritical

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

Ovotesticular DSD and PMDS, for example.

Infertile women have ovaries, and no testes.

Not all have ovaries or were born with ovaries.

If they meet with a doctor, a few tests, and boom, they learn they are infertile.

Even if they are fertile, and their amenorrhea comes from other way. In many cases no tests are done, just "no periods for long time" is enough.

Someone with CAIS can be treated just same way, without any extra testings.

Hermaphrodite means an organism has both male and female sex organs.

Not sex organs, but both gonads, both working gonades.

Hermaphrodite is an organism that can both father a child and give a childbirth.

Also, CAIS do not have both sex organs - they have none of sex organs. They may have male gonades, but not always. Have you even read a bit about CAIS condition?

And why are you want to call slurs an extremely small minority of people that almost no one ever will even meet? I don't understand your hatred. All you write on this site is how you hate vaccines and how you hate people with CAIS (also, there are XX females with CAIS too, who have cervixes and can give birth).

CAIS have dysfunctional testes

In most cases they are functional or they are absent completely. You hate people while being completely ignorant about who they are or their condition.

I see no reason to discuss anything anymore with you.

Do individuals with CAIS have female sex organs? Or do they have male sex organs? by [deleted] in GenderCritical

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think this all should go to debate sub, and stopped here.

Almost of all DSD conditions have serious health issues tied with them, except few.

I'm fine with authoritarianism

It was already clear from your usage of TRA methods and being anti-science.

agenda

Reality is not an agenda. Being strongly anti-reality from "other side" is not countering anti-reality from TRA. It complementing them and proves their ideas.

Also, how are you getting 5-6 upvotes in first few seconds after posting a post?

"CAIS" (Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) proves that Transgenderism is Real" by Kai_Decadence in GenderCritical

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

If their condition is not studied deeply, you can not claim that they are women, or that their body is developed to support ova. You don't know anything would be the conclusion.

You have no idea what you are talking about. There are DSD conditions where males have ovaries, yet they can father a child, but not childbirth. You are very confused.

CAIS can not get periods. Once they hit puberty, they will be aware of their maleness.

You do realize how many women have amenorrhea untreated? When they are asking for tests and being neglected and called just infertile without any more tests? I was called "frigid" for being a lesbian and not liking men, instead of doing any research, my mother almost died because when her periods stopped at age of 35, she just was told "it is early menopuase", while in reality it was completely different issue that could be found out by just few simple tests. Also, many other women would not have periods or would be infertile - who do not have DSD conditions. Why are you combining "intersex" conditions with infertile women and justifying one by another? I only saw such tactics from TRA so far.

I have a strong feeling that you are a male or pretty rich/privileged female, as you seems to have no idea about female anatomy and female problems with healthcare treatment we are receiving.

It's easier to call CAIS hermaphrodite

But it will be untrue and will not work for healthcare at all. This word describes completely different thing. Why you want to lie, when above you said you are doing this because "you don't want to lie"? You are contradicting yourself.

"CAIS" (Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome) proves that Transgenderism is Real" by Kai_Decadence in GenderCritical

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

I see no reason why anyone should be attacking people with complex medical condition for no reason at all, instead of helping them to bear with it. They are extremely rare condition, there can be just 1-2 of them in whole European country. Other AIS are much more common, but they aren't ambigious at all.

Plus they have nothing to do at all with all the "unambigiously males calling themselves women". Focusing on so extremely rare conditions, instead of adressing main issue - is helping gender ideology, as instead of adressing the real important points, we are adressing some almost inexistant cases which are happening so rarely and which are very ambigious and have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. If all people in the whole world with DSD ("intersex") would call themselves transgender - they would be just 10% of transgender people in USA alone.

They have testes

Not always. Plus those testes are inner and not visible, thought. They are finding out about them only at around age of 14-16, when diagnosed with amenorrhea in more advanced countries and at age of around 25-30, when they already married and trying to find out why they are infertile. In less advanced countries they never diagnosed and never know that they have DSD condition.

Their condition is not researched too deeply, as their body is developed like it couldo support ova and it is not supporting sperm (at least in most cases, unlike other AIS conditions, where they are clearly male). Their inner organs are places on a way that female people have. It is never researched about other difference between males and females, on which side they are. Also, they were never tested if they will support ova or sperm. So we can't say for sure if they are male or female until this will be tested.

And in healthcare they are not having same risks as other males, thought not fully as females either.

a hermaphrodite at worst.

There are no human hermaphrodites and can't exist. Also it will be a slur.

Both: What do you think about the arrest in the Wi Spa transgender incident? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 20 insightful - 4 fun20 insightful - 3 fun21 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Sex offender, who lied multiple times before and was flashing genitals to women and girls 20 years ago, and now "miraclously" adopted "I am trans" narrative to get access to spaces where he can flash his half-errected penis to 6 and 9 years old girls? B-but they said this will never happen! That liers would never lie and abusers would not abuse.

I am surprised that there are people who are surprised on this accident happening and being like this.

Also, makes those antifa who harassed women protesting there to look even worse than they already did.

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

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just made a comment right about it:

/s/GCdebatesQT/comments/8avh/_/uwpf

To "equate" there would be "best women" against "lowest category of men". Or "best women" against "30 years as retired men". And so on. As someone said - it is just unfair to women.

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

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

same body height and weight

Weightlifting records.

Female 81-89 kg category: record is 293 kg total. Heaviest female weight category except "superweight".

Male 51-59 kg category: record is 294 kg total. Lightest male weight category, except "underweight".

I will just leave it here.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It was big twitter thread from a person who was banned.

She was comparing reports of different years. Previously gay and lesbian were around same %, gay men were slightly more than lesbians, and transgender were very few, but today lesbians are half of gay and amount of transgender and bisexual increased by 5 times.

I only found 2020 links, but there were 2014 and other years to compare.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/329708/lgbt-identification-rises-latest-estimate.aspx

https://i.imgur.com/N2bUBN6.png

It was smth like lesbians 1.1%, gay men 1.2%, but became lesbians 0.7% and gay men 1.4%, but at the same time female transgender (transmen) increased by almost 30 times or something like that, while male transgenders (transwomen) increased only by 3-4 times.

You can try searching other similar polls. I checked 2017 and 2014 reports on that same site, they have no specification on who is who, just "LGBT raised to 4.5%".

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Last USA survey was interesting, there amount of lesbians decreased drastically (from 1.5% to 0.8%), but amount of transmen and female non-binary increased from 0.1% to something like 3-4% of population. And at the same time amount of gay men not changed.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So how exactly something subjective can be objective and "since birth", when during birth you are lacking cognition capabilities to understand that subjective in the first place? Especially considering that subjective about same objective fact is different for different people.

That's not evidence that the language trait isn't natural.

But language trait is not natural. That is why every language is so different, that is why we created languages like Mathemathics or Esperanto. Language exist to communicaate better and it changes depending on what people in that place decided to use as communication - and why alphabets are so different in different language families (asian, arabic, slavic, latin, etc). Humans are not born with understanding or knowledge of languages, we are slowly learning it with our surroundings, kids who were neglected and not heard language from parents and missed classes - can't communicate and it is hard to them to learn language later in life - like those examples of kids who grew up among animals.

Weirdly I thought the were always coded female but have become more unisex these days. That's just my perception of them.

Just 200 years ago in Europe leggings were "male aristocracy" only. And even more years ago shoes with high heels were for rich men only as well. If poor man or any woman wore them - they could be punished by death.

In ancient Roman Empire - all men were wearing dresses, and pants/troucers were only for women and slaves.

Even nowadays in some ethnicities it is like that - one African tribe have tradition that men are wearing make up and dresses and dancing in front of women, so women chose who is the prettiest from them. On some Oceanic islands it is similar.

So no, it is not "always coded" and not "genetic".

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How can it be "by nature", if kid does not even know what is "feminine" and "masculine", or when "feminine" and "masculine" can change drastically during their lifetime?

When I was young - leggings were for men only, and women were banned from wearing them as "only for prostitutes", now men in leggings are seen as gay or weird, and it is common for women to wear them. For example.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I just answered all those questions in previous posts... And you are misrepresenting text you are reading in those links. There clearly written one thing, but you automatically asuming it means more stuff than there written. It is so bizzare.

etc be female-only organs when males can have them too?

Because they are not working in CAIS and PMDS? They just either "looking like" those, or are underdeveloped versions of female reproductive organs. Their male reproductive organs are working and they can father a child, while they never can mother a child.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think it was in one of their peer reviews, which found a lot of mistakes and the fact that public is lacking any ability to check their findings. I don't think I will be able to find it, I am just reading stuff and that's it - not bookmarking it, sorry.

They said it is 6th reported case, thought.

On the other hand, maybe SRY gene is not the only thing that is determining sex of a person. However, there only 6 reported cases in 50 years from 15 billions people who lived during this time, so it is almost impossible to research...

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

and have penises and testes.

No, there said they have testes and vagina-like opening. Nowhere there said that they have penises. And it said they have prostate and don't have ovaries, in link you screenshoted in other branch of discussion.

Females with condition that is analogues to CAIS do exist, but they do not have much problems because of this and they do not have any testes. And condition is called differently, and that condition is not included into DSD conditions. They are 100% regular female, but they have issues with testosterone. Testosterone in females is helping in menstrual cycles and in few other functions of the body.

I want good articles, not the ones from before that said, again very clearly, that "CAIS identify as women and have penises and testes", and "males with PMDS have uteruses"

I don't understand what you want. Plus you are misrepresenting them, in no article there was said that CAIS have penises and that PMDS have ovaries. And those links are very pro-gender ideology. So even gender ideology supporting studies are agreeing with GC points on those cases.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Sources for what?

You mean why PMDS people can't produce ova when lacking ovaries? Well, because they lack ovaries.

Or why CAIS are capable of supporting sperm-production because they have prostate and working testes? Well, because it is what prostate does, duh.

It is just logical, there no sources needed. But in the links you linked it is stated - the lack of needed organs, so I can send you back to them to read more clearly.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why are your questions so weird and self-contradictory?

I already just answered to those questions: https://saidit.net/s/GCdebatesQT/comments/8560/gc_how_can_there_be_such_things_as_male_and/u9ss?context=3

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've been engaging in this thread, so how about you all do YOUR part and answer the questions?

You did not engaged on my answers and posts on the topic. You only engaging with me on parts where it is personal rambling, like this branch.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've heard of extremely rare cases where it didn't (like once in a billion) so I wanted to cover it all.

It still was, there was just misunderstanding, as doctors were not qualified enough for this.

However, if speak about ALL cases, then true - there are such cases, but they all deadly, childs with it are dying before being born, they can't develop as both male and female or as neither - it is incompatible with being alive in humans.

I am ESL (English second language) so I am not always familiar what is considered outdated terminology in English.

Neither do I. I just know personally person with intersex condition. Or more like, I learned she has such condition only when TRA started misusing her condition and she complained about it, and especially about stuff like in NZ - when they can be denied vital healthcare because now it is not medical condition but just "identity". Before that we never talked about it.

Also, my language never even had such term until last few years, when LGBT organizations from the USA started promoting homophobia and gender ideology. I think in my language it is called something like "group of congenital disorders of sexual development". And they all are not even grouped together, as there are like 3-4 different groups in them.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Usually chromosomes indicates sex

In 99.999% they do. And SRY gene indicates sex in 100% of cases.

intersex

Also this word is misnomer as not representing reality, it was not in use for 20-30 years now - I think it was considered as slur, same as hermaphrodite, until gender identity appeared recently and made slurs like queer or intersex - to be overused again.

clitoris

Virilized clitoris still acts like regular clitoris - they can't pee through it, they can't produce sperm. It just bigger or weird shaped clitoris, that's it.

Testes and penis are male-only organs for dyadic people, and the great majority of trans people are dyadic, not intersex.

Technically even for intersex they are, if you add word "Working", because intersex people have only one set of sexual organs working and other one is not working and is underdeveloped.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

males

Right there in your search it is stated they are males, and here you are, saying they are females.

And "gender identity" has nothing to do with biology. Anyone can identify as anything - that is completely subjective thing. Objective reality does not depends on subjective thoughts.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are misrepresenting the cases. And I am explaining this not for the first time...

First of all, males with PMDS can not produce ova and can produce sperm.

Second, males with CAIS do NOT have penises, and do NOT have any female reproductive organs, they do have testes, but their organism fails to interract with testosterone.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

so why wouldn't I post again, and again when you get in my way?

So you literally saying that you want answers in your way and not real answers?

What's weird is if you're right you should be able to answer these questions no matter how many times they are asked

That is does not mean that you should spam with same questions.

Saying "Earth is not flat" is easy, but that does not mean that it is reason for one person to daily ask you multiple times "Is Earth flat?" and then ignore all answers and ask again.

This is discussion sub. Discussion is when two or more people are discussing something, not when one person is speaking and other just spamming same question over and over, while ignoring all that first person is speaking.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Only repeating what you said on your own, lol.

22 comments and still no actual answers. Good job.

And you still not used a search.

Again, it is like 5-6ths such thread just this week. If you do not want to find answers, why are you even asking? And why are you abusing poor intersex people? They already have hard life with a lot of medicalization needed to survive.

Also, good job wanting mods to abuse their authority.

Removing someone who disrespects everyone in sub, who spamming same questions and refuses to ingage in discussion, creating same threads even after they were removed time after time after time is not "abusing authority".

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Because you are showing disrespect and specifically trolling, that is your clear intent. Again, if you do not respect us, why should we respect you? You are saying QT are bad, but how you are acting is much worse than QT.

But you are right. Instead of answering you, mods should just instantly delete and permaban you every time when you are appearing, as you are acting from bad faith.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just because someone is supposed to answer the questions, this does not mean that you should act rude, ignore answers and disrespect everyone around. Especially when you understand what you are doing and doing it intentionally, based on second part of your post.

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Don't lie, all questions were answered, but that is not stopping you from asking them again.

You are acting like an abusive man in relationship, you are asking same question and threatening with something (of "not stopping" in this case), until others comply and lie - or answer what you want to hear, not what they think and not what truth is.

It is extremely rude and unempathetic from you to act this way.

Also, using people with DSD conditions as this is very rude as well. And such ideas as yours are leading to intersex people getting killed or losing healthcare: https://saidit.net/s/GenderCritical/comments/850y/the_real_harm_of_lumping_everything_together_as/

GC: How can there be such things as male and female in the presence of intersex conditions? How can there be no such things as "male pregnancy" and "futanari"? by BigSecret in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is not nice from you to ask same question, ignore answers and force users to repeat their answers and spend their time.

If you really wanted to hear answers, you'd do it yourself and you'd not ignore everything said to you.

If you disrespect us so much and do not care, why should we?

The real harm of lumping everything together as "gender identity", which can lead to death of people who really need help

by VioletRemi to /s/GenderCritical from self.GenderCritical

QT: Is not dating people due to beliefs bigotry? by wokuspokus in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is okay to exclude people from your dating pool and sexual life for whatever reason. Actually...you don't even need a reason to exclude someone if you just don't like them or don't want to bother.

Gender dysphoria doesn't exist by SexualityCritical in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That what happens when your whole healthcare system is privately owned and profit-oriented.

I have only good things to say about how my mental illnesses were treated by social healthcare (and for free) in Eastern Europe - it saved my life, as I completely lost my mind at one point. Not sure if it is because I was lucky to get to good doctors, or because in general it is good here.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am not advocating on banning it, just explaining why it is in most cases used as something bad.

I already explained why it is not "inclusive" - because for transwomen they are going with male anatomy and just saying "women's penis" or "women's prostate", and attacking women's organizations who are focusing on female anatomy. While for transmen - they are discouraged to focus on female anatomy and call it "men's vagina" or "men's clitoris" and instead using terms like "front hole" instead.

That site is calling "sex with penis" as lesbian sex, and half of "tips for lesbian sex" are tips for heterosexual sex, there basically only 3-4 tips will help lesbians at all: https://www.healthline.com/health/healthy-sex/how-do-lesbians-have-sex#sex-varies

So I would not listen to that site much.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I haven't said they are calling it "girl dick", I said it is transwomen who are doing it and are fine with naming their penis as penis and in general using male-specific words to describe themselves and just adding "women's X" to them, while transmen are pushed away from using female-specific words for themselves. Thought, rarely I still see "man's vagina" - but mostly it is using ones who are harassing gay men to sleep with them.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So you are doubling down on conflating sex and gender? Then it will be impossible to discuss anything with you, as it will be like discussing with scientology cultist, when they have different meanings for same words, so they understand you completely differently.

Sexuality is about sex, not about gender identity or gender presentation. Saying it is about gender identity is homophobic and it is one of main pressure points of homophobic societies today and century ago. In USSR it was one of big points on pressure, which still haunts me even today, and why I tried to escape being lesbian and to become bisexual, I even married a man trying to convert myself (really great man, one of the best I've ever met, we are still friends with him).

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, but why only them, while for transwomen it is fine to use "girl dick"? Why transmen are pushed to not use "man's vagina", while transwomen are pushing for everyone to use "women's penis"?

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But "front hole" doesn't exist to insult

I actually would disagree. In all of its possible and previous usages (men describing women as commodity, gay men mocking women, etc) it was used as derogatory phrase. And I don't believe that it was "re-claimed" at any point - I haven't even heard anyone speaking about it at all.

Even for transmen it is used mostly in derogatory way. For transwomen it is used "girldick" or "woman's penis", not "front pillar". Yet, for transmen it is not "man vulva" or "man vagina", but something else - something that previously was used as way to dehumanize women. And even cosmetic penis for transmen is often called "phallus" and not "penis", unlike when it is said about transwomen and their cosmetic vulva.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It could be teacher.

And surgery is not just rare, it is extremely expensive, in young age transmen do not have enough skin to even make it work, so need to take it additionally from other places of body, and in 99% of cases it has complications and need more surgeries than one (on average 17 per transman who is doing surgery). So that was either private college for rich kids, or that transman was a teacher - grown up. And considering GB is fine with grooming children, I guess it would be fine for her to do so.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

First of all, I was not speaking about you personally. It is signs of narcissism to take general as personal, try to avoid such behaviour, as in most cases it is just not true.

Second of all, you wrote you like transmen, not trans males. Trans males are transwomen. Male is biological sex and objective reality, while "gender" man/woman (by GI side) is socially constructed and can be changed. So do not conflate sex and gender together, they are different things.

It is impossible to communicate, when you are changing definitions of words you are using from post to post.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If someone is attracted to both males and females - they are bisexual, regardless of what they say. If someone is attracted only to same sex as they are - they are homosexual, regardless of what they say. If someone is attracted only to opposite sex - they are heterosexual, regardless of what they say.

It is same as numbers. It is just describing what there is, it is not identity or something social, it just describes something that exist or happening. If animal likes to have sex with both males and females - that animal will be called bisexual, why humans are receiving different treatment? Humans are very special only in religions, but in reality we are not that different from other animals.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sexuality is not self-identification, we born this way, we can't change it, even if we try. And oh I tried.

Sexualities are descriptive terms, don't be so homophobic. If someone have two hands but says they have three, they still have two. Numbers are descriptive as well. If there two - there two, if there three - there three. If someone likes both sexes, they are automatically bisexual. And there nothing bad in that. It is okay to be bisexual. I wish I was.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And bisexual is not a bad thing, why so often bisexuals are so ashamed to call themselves bisexual?

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sexuality is attraction to sex, not to gender presentation. Otherwise butch lesbians and feminine gay men would not exist or would be called in "straight relationship". I know homophobes often are saying this in countries like Iran, but it is simply not true. As it was already told here - lesbian just can't be attracted to someone who is male or "was male" - even if she will really try to. It just will not possible, body will not respond, regardless of how hard she tries. Same for all monosexualities, only for bisexuality it is different.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

By the stories of young transmen and many detransitionares - it is not the case, needs and wants of transmen are often ignored if it will benefit transwomen. In general sex-based specifics in power relations are staying and transmen are receiving same treatment as women, while transwomen acting like selfish kind of men. Recently I saw video of "just starting detransition" lesbian, who started it when realized that she is being lied too and was dissapointed by her community - because she said "no" to transwoman, while was passing decently as man already, and was villified, at same time other transwoman said "no" to transwoman and everyone said it is fine. And in the end she did not felt that transition is helping her to escape misogyny and that her body even now is viewed as sexual object and "reward", and she is not seen as a human being, so she detransitioned.

Gender dysphoria doesn't exist by SexualityCritical in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 10 insightful - 7 fun10 insightful - 6 fun11 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

In one research tram drivers all had similar brain structure.

Tram-driving is the new sex!

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'd say that 1998 when Rivers started stalking and harassing women who were just having their own lesbian-only and female-only events - was way before GC movement started (also, why transgender-only events are held and praised, but lesbian-only events are promoted by woke media as "bigoted"? Why one group trumps another?). First GC in modern sense started massively appearing somewhere around time when Stonewall started dropping LGB and became big when Stonewall completely dropped LGB - so years around 2012-2015. Gender identity is very new concept, from around 2005-ish or so, so there could not be anyone critical of this concept before it appearance. On Tumblr there were modern-type GC circles before that, but those were limited and in their own bubbles.

If you mean gender stereotypes critical - second wave, etc - then it was about absolutely different thing, it was against gender stereotypes, it was about "men and women can do and look any way they like, men and women are equal, society should not enforce rigid stereotypes, and gender nonconformity should be the new norm". It is still often believed by modern GC people, as many of them are gnc themselves and are feminists, but not all. And even "Transsexual Empire" was mostly criticizing gender stereotypes and that transsexualism is called a diseas and that "following strict gender stereotypes and medicalization" was the cure to that disease. Book is pretty agressively written, thought, but it is common for old-school feminism, plus author is a lesbian, who suffered from "translesbians", so she is even more mad than normal. However, even with all that, that book is mostly criticizing gender stereotypes, most of it not about transsexualism at all, and "the disease of gender" and not the gender identity or anything like that. And, well, it is basically the only book on a topic from those times.

All: Disclosure and Consent by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Lmao, "blame feminists in all bad".

Or you mean when in 1973 heterosexual tw came to lesbian convention and demanded lesbians to sleep with him? Or maybe Dana Rivers murdering and then burning lesbian couple and their son? It was all long before GC movement even started to appear.

QT: What rights don’t trans people have? by wokuspokus in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Stonewall wanted to remove rape by deception from a crime list, but only for transgender and non-binary people.

Situations like this happened at least dozen times, and it is only ones which got into big news: https://www.themix.net/2020/01/transgender-pedophile-transgender-woman-hormones/

So yeah, you are correct.

QT: What rights don’t trans people have? by wokuspokus in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sounds rapey.

QT: What rights don’t trans people have? by wokuspokus in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Male or female is not gender identity, it is sex.

QT: What rights don’t trans people have? by wokuspokus in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But lacking gender identity is making someone "agender". Why changing rules mid-way?

QT: What rights don’t trans people have? by wokuspokus in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Depends on "transness" of that transgender person and how deep self-ID has gotten. As was noted previously - Hubbard would still be top 15%, which is above 85% of the male competitors...

In Canada, for example, non-binary male transgender can compete in both male and female team at same time, without any hormones, surgeries or anything. Just your regular manly male bloke: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4plrHvWYAAWcEl?format=jpg&name=medium

GC: Scientists say sex is a spectrum, even an illusory man-made social construct by Fastandthecurious in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Post-modernism (and post-modernistic denial of reality) is the bane of western society.

GC: Scientists say sex is a spectrum, even an illusory man-made social construct by Fastandthecurious in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Even with asexual reproduction and parthenogenesis, almost always it is only two sexes or only females who are present during it.

I believe only some bacteria and mushrooms have more than two types of gametes, the rest of living creatures are either all female, have two sexes or sexless.

Both: What do you think about the transgender incident at the Wi Spa in Los Angeles? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That male flashed in like half a meter from a 9 years old girl. That could traumatize her for life.

GC Participants: Do you consider yourself a radfem? by usehername in GenderCritical

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 6 fun8 insightful - 5 fun9 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

I had an experience with political lesbian, I was just experimenting after I accepted myself as a lesbian. I lived in homophobic society and even married a man in tries to start loving men, my ex-husband was really great person, one of best men I've ever met and we are still friends, but nothing worked in bed between us, I insisted to go to doctors to fix it, but they just said I am either asexual or frigid, we divorced and then I slept with a woman in dormitory and found out that I am not asexual - I am very sexually active, I just can't be aroused by men, only can be aroused by women. So after finding that out and my first relationship with bisexual women, I started experimenting, I found radfem who was "political lesbian" and "chose to be lesbian" - I thought "I have no idea about sexuality, maybe it is like that, sadly I can't chose for myself, maybe something wrong with me". She had some bad experience with men and wanted to be "all for women" and "separatist", and liked idea of political lesbianism.

However, when I slept with her, she was almost disgusted from it and very irresponsive. I saw in her myself with my ex-husband. Then I realized it is complete bullshit. She just was trying very hard to like women, but was not able to. Same as I tried to like men, really-really tried, but was not able to.

Bindel

You just mentioned her, and here she is: https://twitter.com/LesbianLabour/status/1407596620825440260

Saying that it is just a choice. And there so many homophobic comments there by GC or feminists.

I like this line of comments there, tho: https://twitter.com/Iamthisnotthat1/status/1407678822028398600

QT: If all these "third genders" around the world, throughout history, in all these different cultures are transgender, then where are all the gay people? by SnowAssMan in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreeing with this.

There are societies that label all gay people a "third gender", but then differentiate between the gender conforming & cross-gender conforming ones.

Most "third genders" in cultures I know are always very strongly patriarchic societies, and third gender are always gay, weak or infertile men who have less rights or power than men, but more than women. In most cases it is something like "to not shame males with you being not manly enough - we will say you aren't really a man". Women never got such "thrid gender" group (except few islamic countries, but there it is different, I'll explain later). Mostly women were pretending to be men in cases when women wanted to be free from oppression, or to learn science or to work on some jobs (like surgeon) which were forbidden for women to work. Other case is when lesbians were trying to live together, and only way was if they moved to new place and one was pretending to be a man on public ("Sea Purple" nice movie with this part, thought it was forced there). In those Islamic countries I've mentioned before - when husband of woman died, and she has no sons, no brother and no father alive, then she can inherit what her husband owned, but she must try look masculine, wear masculine clothing and never marry or date men ever again.

QT: If all these "third genders" around the world, throughout history, in all these different cultures are transgender, then where are all the gay people? by SnowAssMan in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

5%

If someone is 5% gay or 5% straight - they are bisexual. They don't need to act on it, but it is who they are, and they will have harder time understanding exclusive same-sex or opposite-sex attraction.

documentary

It is pretty homophobic point of view, pushed by society. That homosexuality is performative, and that it is not just same-sex attraction. I lived in a country where homosexuality was outlawed, and such view was (and somewhat still is) the main view on homosexuality. That only either "manly" or "ugly" women who "can't find a man because of their own flaws" are becoming lesbians, and they are pretending to be men to date women. And that only one who is "filling male role in relationship" is lesbian, other woman is not. Which is ridiculous, because it is way too heteronormative, lesbians are two women - we need no "man" in relationship. Same is with gay men - that only "more feminine one, or who is filling women's role" and one "who is penetrated" are gays. In USSR man who loves men and raped them would not be considered as gay, but his victim will be stigmatized as gay, even if he don't like men and was forcibly raped. That view is saying htat "nice looking" or "feminine" women who exclusively loving women are not lesbians, not homosexual. It is just homophobic view of old society, which was adopted by self-hatred and tries to adapt to society - as it was the only way for lesbians to be together without being prosecuted or shamed. I had such self hatred because of homophobia in society too, and I tried "to be a man" at few points in life, as I wanted to be free like men and seen as a human being, and because my homosexuality put me in troubles (like I got fired from job, beaten and almost "correctively" raped, etc). Lesbian, gay and bisexual are not a performative roles, it is sexualities. All you need to be lesbian is to be female and exclusively love and be attracted to females, does not matter how you look, how you act or how you think.

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

[–]VioletRemi 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In both situations we are ending up with "someone looking like a man in women's spaces".

But in one situation that someone would be female, with around same strenght as other females, without ability to impregnate and with around 1000 times less tendencies to violence than males. And in other situation that someone would be male, who is stronger, on average more violent, who will not understand female's lived experience and needs.

In one case there can be some misunderstanding with transmen. In other case woman will be charged for asking why someone who is identifying as woman once a week on thursdays is accessing shelters or showers.

In cases like with Californian shelter it will be different too - when such transman would be in the shower with other vulnureable women they would still have cosmetically changed female body. While what we got is some male pretending to be transwoman with erected penis showering with women who were raped recently or survived domestic violence and making sexualized comments about them. And when they refused to shower - by rules of shelter they should be excluded from it (as can't be dirty there, need to eat and shower) and be homeless.

And so on. In both cases it is "can be abused", but in one case women can say "no" and most times that "manly looking person" will be female, and in other case women would be punished for saying "no" and most times that "manly looking person" will be male, who can just pretend to be trans (as nowadays all you need is just say "I am woman today", so not really much work for them to do - especially remembering so recent doctor and priest scandals, when paedos studied for decade to gain access to victims, compared to that just saying few words is just nothing). And in some countries like Norway or Canada, it is possible for man just say they are non-binary, and that is giving them ability to chose which spaces they want to enter - so even less effort needed.

And anyways, IF they pass really well, they can just use toiled to "sex they are passing well as" and that would not be that big of a problem. But overwhelming majority of transgender people does not pass, and many of predators are not even trying, so they would be easy to spot on in such scenario.

QT: If all these "third genders" around the world, throughout history, in all these different cultures are transgender, then where are all the gay people? by SnowAssMan in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Homosexuality was mentioned and banned in religious books 2500 years ago, and homosexuality is observed in animals and there were even found evidence of homosexuality among primated hundreds thousands years ago. So no, it is not "appeared" in 19th century.

Or you mean word itself? Naming something differently is not changing the thing itself. If we name shotgun as "healing machine" - when we use it on person, it will still kill them, not heal. Words and language is an instrument, they exist only to communicate between people, so they must mean the same or almost the same for people, so we can communicate and explain our thoughts to each other. That is why all words have their definitions.

QT: If all these "third genders" around the world, throughout history, in all these different cultures are transgender, then where are all the gay people? by SnowAssMan in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not really, homosexuality existed and was named in other cultures and in religious books outside of the west and thousands years ago. Also homosexuality is observed among a lot of different species of animals, even among ones who have no social culture or are loners.

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

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It was actually the truth, thought. A huge percent of population was illiterate (some were able to read few words here and there). It was one of main focuses of Lenin - to teach peasants to write and read. This started before Lenin, thought - during Stolypin Reforms in 1906-1913 years. Before 1890s almost all peasants were illiterate, but percentage was lowering during 1900s and with Stolypin Reforms up to fifth of peasants received at least some basic education - but mostly because now peasants received their own land that was belonging to them and not to landlord (or later Kolgosp), so they had much more free time now. It was mostly self-education - as a lot of peasants were hungry for knowledge. This also increased amount of harvests by 20%.

That was one of goals of Stolypin Reform - to give good working or already a bit rich peasants more power and make them first of a kind of "middle class", so they will start supporting Empire like aristocracy, as aristocracy was not able anymore to hold all people with military, and they needed more support. So they decided to make some peasants to a richer class with more education (and land problem was huge issue as peasants were already starting to revolt around 1902-1904, and revolted in 1905, - plus economics of Empire was dying because 90% of resources belonged to aristocracy and they were doing nothing with it). Around quarter of all peasants benefited from this greatly, around half of peasants benefited from this at all, and last quarter either changed nothing or became even poorer, as they were not able to buy-out their land from landlord even with help of Peasant Bank, so they either went in big debts or moved to parts of Russian Empire with cheap land (like asian part and Syberia).

Basically all this was sponsored and paid from the personal pockets of Tsar, some merchants and some rich aristocracy - part wanted to not lose power due to revolution, part were siding with peasants and wanted to help them.

This not fixed the land issue, because many "between middle and poor" peasants were just selling their land to more rich peasants or to landlords and going away into cities without a land, or moving to Ural. This was one of big reasons of the revolution - 25% of peasants were not pleased by this reform, 50% were slightly displeased and 25% were happy with it. Poorer and bad working peasants were angry on better working or luckier peasants and were starting to speak against them. However, revolution was started by rich military and middle class city workers, not by peasants. It made huge damage to peasants as well, as most documents were destroyed and land was re-distributed with so-called "uravnilovka" (slur-sounding version of "forced equalization") where peasants were given same amount of land regardless of how they were working and if they were just alcoholics or had a lot of land previously, just "how many kids or family members you have" and X amount of land per person. That made population even more unhappy than it was with monarchy, that's when Bolsheviks appeared with October Revolution (which wasn't really revolution, as it was done by small amount of people, mostly cityfolks and immigrants from "sealed train", and was not widely supported by peasants, like it was in 1905, when peasants themselves with pitchforks were fighting against military).

The fact that middle class peasants were created to support Empire - it was one of reasons why Bolsheviks were afraid of those peasants and middle class, they thougth they will support Empire and will not be willing to share their land with government and Kolgosps.

A lot of more wealthy or literate peasants were imprisoned or murdered during revolution, there are memes about "Lenin reducing illiteracy".

Like this from early 90s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX_S1DXHW4Y

They are saying there "Lenin wrote a letter to a poor crowd" and then "What? No one can read it?" and peasants "Nah, we are all illiterate", and then they started sho1oting and caption appears "Painting: Bolsheviks reducing illiteracy".

I may be incorrect in some details, as I am telling from memory (and my last history classes were in university 13-14 years ago, as I was studying on engineering and IT speciality, so we had history only two years, not all six years), but should be close to how it was.

And why am I writing all this, lol? It is clearly huge off-topic in this conversation and in subsaidit in general. So I should just stop :D

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

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not really, working class and peasants weren't synonyms. Peasnats had much less rights and there were two types of peasants, one was basically slaves, as they were not able to marry or move without permission of the landlord they were working for. Other part of peasants were more close to working class, and mostly were living in cities, but they still were lacking a lot of rights. I believe there only around 3-5% of working class and 80-85% of peasants during that time and rest were aristocracy, military or merchants.

For some reason those peasants in villages who had absolutely no rights are not called slaves, even thought they basically were them.

Later it started slowly to change and peasants were given their own pieces of land, which still was owned by landlord, but at least they had almost all they grown there for themselves now.

which is why their revolution was so successful.

That is not so much true as well, because revolution was aimed for bad workers.

In villages peasants who were good working and were able to have good harvests were called Kulak's, and they were attacked by people who were making revolution. In most cases those who came to rule were peasants who were not able to work properly. Later Kulak's were called any peasant who was not giving their last grain to new governemnt.

Later new wave of good working peasants appeared, but during Stalin they were destroyed completely and often put in prison or murdered. So only bad working peasants left who were working "because it needed" and not because they liked to work or know how to work. That led to huge drops in harvesting, as most people who knew what to do were in prison or murdered.

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

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Those were written from the view of intelligence, who tried to side with poor people. So it is "view of rich on how poor are living". Leo Tolstoy was rich aristocrate, but he was talking a lot with poor rightless people - so he know a lot, but not firsthand and never experienced how it to born and live as a low class. Actually I don't remember any big low class people writers in classic russian literature, but I may forgot some, as I had literature classes decade ago. However, late ukrainian literature is often was written by low class, self-educated people (who became higher class and that's why they were able to publish - so still very rare case among low class people) or very poor aristocracy who lost everything - still most writers were from poor aristocracy, but were many from rightless class (basically slaves, but it was not called "slavery", even thought they had same no rights as slaves) - but they were mostly writting about the lowest of classes. During that time bigger part of Ukraine was under Russian Empire control, so society was very similar here, with only difference of extra pressure based on nationality. Would be really cool if there were more low class writters from those times, thought - to see everything from their perspective.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why are trans men always left out of the conversation? - Huck Magazine

That article is funny. Author is showing all the examples how male privilege works, how males have much more platform, then saying that when author started passing as a man - received so much privileges and got a platform. And then surprised why transwomen, especially not passing ones, are gaining so much traction, getting platform and are focused, while transmen are forgotten even by trans community and their voices are silent. First half of article it explained really well - because they are seen as female and transwomen still seen as male, that's why. And that's why everything is changed when they starting to "pass very well". And instead of recognizing this sexism from males and patriarchy, author is blaming feminists and women on this instead. Similar to how transwomen are blaming feminists and women on them being murdered and not blaming conservative men who are murdering them.

Reminded me book "Why women are blamed for everything". Such a typical situation from there.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is insane how they are ignoring all the sexism and patriarchy and saying "it was a choice". And they never wondering - why all the "trans" of the past are transmen, and that "third genders" in other cultures are always gay or infertile men. They ignore that woman was not allowed by law to work in science or be surgeon or live open public life, so of course some women would pretend to be a man, but not because "they feel as men", no - because they want to be a human being with full rights. I pretended to be a man to get a job in engineering/IT, because when I was sending resume with female name, I was instantly dismissed, few times I was laughed out, yet when I started presenting with male name - I was called to personal meetings by HR almost always. Am I transman now too? It is stupid.

And TRA with LibFems are like that everywhere. They for some reason think that women around the world and women 200 years ago had same rights and freedoms as white privileged women in 1st world country today. Especially it is seen how they are defending hijab and burqa. Saying "it is a choice", when in majority of islamic word burqa or hijab are required by the law and in places where it is not required by the law - family have a right to disown a girl or a woman if she refuses to wear burqa or hijab, in Iran men are throwing acid in face of women who not wearing hijab. Women in thouse countries are spicifically going outside without hijab or burqa as form of a protest to get human rights. Yet on West it is called "it is a choice".

And then those same people are saying that "it is libfems who fought for all the achievements have" and saying that 2nd wave, suffragettes and so on were "libfems" too, while those women held almost opposite beliefs to libfems and were calling oppression sex based and were saying that oppression is based on sex class, and not put on individual women, when libfems are focusing on individualism and choice.

It is complete lack of understanding. Even in this sub GB does this all the time, she is posting "examples" that are completely disproving her position, but she thinks those people "made a choice" and supporting her narrative, she completely misses the point and can't see the oppression and sexism pushing women to do what they did.

QT: How is the concept of a "gender identity" not sexist? by Penultimate_Penance in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is so ridiculous argument. You don't know what you would be thinking then - you would grow up with different surroundings, different abilities, as a different person, most likely you would have different if not opposite views on some questions, you would be just different person, so your reaction would be very different to yours now. Our experience is what is making us ourselves for the most part.

GC: What about male women, male men, female women and female men? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If "woman is just a social construct", that means that those things are imposed by socium on people. This means that transsexual/transgender people should never demand pronouns or special laws, this means that pronouns and other stuff should be happening naturally and forced upon them socially. So that big buffed "it's ma'am" guy would not be called "sir", but would be called "ma'am" by majority in society, which isn't the case and that's why that guy is demanding this.

So in either case any meaning of "woman" does not work for transgenders or transsexuals.

All: Is autogynephilia normal in natal women? by CRTmonitor in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Aytogynephilia is impossible in natal women just by definition.

Thinking of yourself as a woman (female) during sex or putting yourself on a woman's (female) position when watching porn while being a woman (female) yourself - is the norm.

I think there was already such post in this sub, but was deleted because of trolling. There were big answers to it. I found only version of it in GC sub, tho: /s/GenderCritical/comments/7m8p/can_cisgender_women_biological_females_be/

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don’t think they would ever say that, but I think that’s what they believe.

I know few TW in real life and few through internet.

Most of them believing that women are overprivileged over men. Some of them believed that they are "the best woman", because they are like "smart like man, sexy like woman, and can't get pregnant, so only positives".

And there a lot of insulting views they have. That is not specific to them, thought - I met many regular men in internet who think like that. There even whole "Gynosphere Theory" I recently saw in /s/LGBDropTheT, where men (and some women) are theorising that whole world for last 500 years are centered on women and women are really rulling the world. And arguments there are such absurd, one I saw was "In arabian countries and in medieval ages, men are fighting to death to get a woman, so men's life means nothing, but women's life is super valued and focused on" - ignoring that woman in this part has no say, she is just commodity for which few men are fighting and then father of that woman is gifting woman to one who shown to be the best in eyes of father, or ignoring that in medieval age it happened only to the richest women and men, while for 99.999% men and women reality was different. And so on, such a twisted perception - they see that "OnlyFans" and "prostitution" are huge privileges of women, because "men can't so easily get money".

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'll add this: https://uncommongroundmedia.com/what-was-happening-before-just-be-nice-feminism-part-iii-west-coast-lesbian-conference-1973/

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

(I apologize for the shitty formatting ahead, I have no idea how to do quotations on saidit lol)

Use ">" before the quoted text.

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

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

Interesting to know about USA. Thanks!

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Which I mentioned. And is "invasive", but we should do it.

You are not answering my questions. You ignored every question in every answer to you.

I ask again - Why? Why we should do it, especially considering how rare it is and that majority doctors and midwives will never ever encounter one in whole their practice?

but doctors should do it, doing x-rays and blood tests on newborns is "invasive" but they should be done.

Why? In many countries doctors are not even on childbirth at all, if childbirth is going well. There just nurse, midwife.

CAIS are male. Not female.

There are females with CAIS too, but they are just normal females, with some issues with periods, as we need some androgenes for menstruation to go well - and those females are insensitive to them. Females with CAIS are not considered as intersex, thought, because they are completely unambigious and there are different other disorders females can have to be insensitive to androgenes.

You are very ignorant, tbh. Not sure why I am even trying to talk with you, as you are ignoring half of what I am writing and then saying something that is opposite to what I've said.

By that logic, a "trans woman" who chopped his dick and testes off, and on the outside totally passes as a woman

No. Males with CAIS never had penis, and they have naturally developed labia and clitoris, which are looking and acting like female ones, so unlike transwomen after surgery, it is not possible to tell if they are not females without X-rays (and I have experience with transsexuals, so I know it is completely different - especially scent and lack of self-lubricating and self-cleaning). It is absolutely different with Transwomen. Same with Estrogene - it is produced naturally in males with CAIS, they don't need any injections.

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is almost like GC feminists are not really hating transgender people, like Stonewall and LibDems are saying, and almost like it is poorly written laws and attacks on women rights and kid safeguarding is what the real issue. And it is not like current definition of "trans" and new laws are opening arms for all kinds of abusers who are saying they are trans only to get free out of jail card or gain privilege (like with Wadhwa Mridul or Aimee Challenor who got jobs without background checks or any education or any skills just because they are trans) or to get access to victims.

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh come on. The minute someone is born, they are naked, and their genitalia is seen. That's how doctors figure out they are male or female.

No, doctors are making blood test or ultrasound during pregnancy, around 10-12th week of pregnancy. And when kid is born they are only checking by genitals if everything correct.

Both males and females with CAIS are looking like a female when born. To check if it is male or female for sure, they will need to do X-rays and blood test of a newborn. That's pretty invasive and does not worth it to do, because it will take a lot of resources and can hurt mother or kid, especially when speaking about such rare condition that majority of doctors and midwives will never ever encounter in their whole life and medical practice. And this condition is not causing any troubles until 16-20 years anyways, unlike some intersex conditions which require saving after birth, but those conditions do not have ambigious genitals looking like female ones - they have "penis-looking" genitals instead of "vulva-looking genitals" and they are starting to vomit and similar stuff.

You DO understand everyone does tests later on right? All it takes is look at genes, or the inside of the body with a device to show if there are underdeveloped organs.

But why do it for every kid if only one in few millions girls born will have it? Why do it on rest? It is not saving anyones lives and can do harm - either physical or psychological. Why are you so obsessed with this question about extremely rare condition?

People with CAIS have testes, so even if they didn't do more tests, they would see the testes, and figure out it's a male.

Those testes are underdeveloped and inside body, they are not seen when you see them naked. People with CAIS looking completely like a female when naked, they even have labia and underdeveloped clitoris. So you can't really say it is not a woman by such inspection.

Looks like you think that testes are outside and visible, that's why you are saying those ignorant and very weird things, I suppose. If you thought that testes are visible, then your posts starting to make at least a little sense, actually.

Your intention is to not do tests, to keep things hidden until some day people with DSD figure out they have DSD.

As I said, DSD which are posing danger to life are seen early and without tests. Most are found out before or during puberty because of abnormalities or other health issues. Almost all DSD conditions are unambigiously male or female looking as well. So you will never confuse them with other sex. Only very few of 40 conditions have any ambiguity to them.

It is a mess. You are too blinded to see it.

Which mess? That one in two millions women who have completely female phenotype, was raised as a girl and maybe not even knowing themselves about their condition, is someone with CAIS? I don't see any mess here. They aren't much stronger than other women, they can't impregnate, they do not have "male entitlement" nurtured, and it is impossible to tell that they have CAIS without special medical tests. Obviously if they are starting to date with someone, they should enclose it, and as far as I know - majority who know of their situation do.

because I saw none.

Just doing ctrl+F on "?" showed me there were few.

And you not answered my question:

What do you mean "now we know"?

We know what? And we - who? And why only now? This information about CAIS condition is known for long time now. Or you mean you think that woman you was chatting has CAIS? I think she said she had CAH, it is completely different condition, not even remotely related.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Drug induced lactation is very bad for kid, thought. When mother is taking any kind of drugs or hormones, it is often recommended to her to stop breastfeeding. While for males it is needed super huge amount of drugs or hormones to even start producing something that looks similar to milk, that it would be really harmful for kid (and it will be lacking all the needed products anyways, because mother's milks brings much more than just nutrition).

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Now we know.

What do you mean "now we know"?

Without doctors checking them they don't know. They are looking like females and in general their body phenotype developed like female one. So there no reason to think they aren't females for anyone around.

Only when their health issues are hitting them, or when they are trying to find why they are infertile or why they have no menstruation at all - only then doctors making tests and finding out they have CAIS.

With PAIS or MAIS it is much easier, because they are not completely inresponsive to androgenes, so they are developing like males who have extra estrogene in them.

They (doctors, family, etc) should test whether or not someone has a DSD in hospitals before or after birth.

Why? It is invasive treatment that can harm kids. And CAIS is so super rare, that in a year there can be 0 births with this condition in country.

Intersex conditions that require fast treatment are visible when kid is born, so that is when tests are made. And those tests are made mostly to save lives to those intersex kids, because males and females require different treatment.

That way we won't be in this mess.

In what mess? There is no mess at all.

I didn't ignore. They answered my questions, and I understood. The only part that needed addressing, I addressed.

You not answered questions and you asked again what already was answered.

They didn't ask any questions for me to answer them.

Lies, she did asked you questions here and previously. And other people did same, but you never answering them.

You are misrepresenting what other people said or asked once again.

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No one can even know that they are male, including themselves, so your arguments are very stupid, and as was said - they aren't done in good faith and they are making no sense in real life. And those people are 5000 times (or 50000 times? My math is bad today) more rare than transgender people as well.

You are acting with her like an abusive person, so of course by your complete ignorance and repeating same questions over and over and ignoring her arguments you will make a person to write with caps lock or be mad at you. Such actions are either making you a troll or abusive narcissistic person who only wants things "your way". So it is showing you from a very bad side.

Discussion is when two people speaking and not when one is answering questions and other ignoring all answers and all questions. Sub is for discussions.

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This person reminds me one discussion I had in this sub with one banned guy previously.

He was asking same question over and over, I was giving him big posts, with dozen links and researches, but he was just "admit you are wrong" and asking same question.

He just wanted compliance, he did not wanted to know the answer on questions.

This person looks absolutely like that guy. Such entitlement, lack of empathy and narcissism. "All will be my way, and if you disagree, I will annoy and attack you until you agree" - it is very common for abusive people to act like this. My father was gaslighting and attacking like this too. Even when he know he is wrong, he was day after day insisting we agree with him, and no other answer he was accepting.

It is "Do it to Julia" tactics from 1984, they will annoy you until you gave up and accept their terms, they don't care about truth and about people.

GC: How to know the sex of an intersex person? Are intersex people not 100% male or female? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is not what she wrote...

You are lying about what other people said.

You did same yesterday about words of Collin, you did it few weeks ago about words of other people. You are misrepresenting people's words.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, it is artificially induced creation with extra treatment, so not natural.

It may be nice if it will work, as then infertility in some infertile women can be cured.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So again how am I wrong?

Again, not all women are producing them. Only ones who are pregnant with girls (or as someone mentioned above - during infertility treatment can produce a few for yourself, but require stem cells). So saying that "all women are producing ovums and men are producing sperm" is very male-centric description and very male-centric understanding of biology.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are all the time insisting that we are creating ovums to fit that male-centric definition of sex about creating gametes. I pointed to you that it is not how female biology work and that we are not actively creating gametes, if ever at all: /s/GCdebatesQT/comments/7uw7/_/tg0t

Only women pregnant with girls ever creating any gametes at all. So up to half of all women, if not more, are never creating any gametes in our lives at all.

I can't understand what can be not clear here.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

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

You asked:

Yes I know? How does that change anything?

Not what you are saying now that you asked me. Are you trying to confuse me?

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

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

What exactly?

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are you trolling or something? You are completely ignoring female biology. Like you don't even want to know about women at all.

As I said, they are made by mother in body of a girl she is pregnant with, and that is done only once during pregnancy. So only women who are pregnant with girls ever producing any at all.

QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

to not view or think of anyone who says such things as equals or even just people. There is something inherently cruel and hateful about it, it makes me really sad.

That's how things like nazism arised and how "good people" are turned into murdering machines, while thinking they are doing something good. It is common for cults and dictatorships, who require common enemy who is dehumanized.

GC: What are the differences between sex segregation and racial segregation? Why is the former required, while the latter is discriminatory? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 6 fun8 insightful - 5 fun9 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

You found me even here :D

GC: What are the differences between sex segregation and racial segregation? Why is the former required, while the latter is discriminatory? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Because they are in safe space and I may make them feel uncomfortable.

GC: What are the differences between sex segregation and racial segregation? Why is the former required, while the latter is discriminatory? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's also NOT customary behavior for lesbians and bi women, either. At all.

I am often ashamed to look in such spaces at all, as I feel a bit guilty. And most lesbians I know are not looking at other women, especially not staring in such spaces.

GC: What are the differences between sex segregation and racial segregation? Why is the former required, while the latter is discriminatory? by Tea_Or_Coffee in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sex-segregated spaces were created to include women in social life (and sports), give women equal chances and opportunities. Men and women are very different and average "standart" or unisex spaces are not serving women any good and made with men in mind. That's why, by the way, including males in women's sports and spaces is not inclusive, it is exclusionary.

Race segregation was created to exclude black people from social life.

Sex-segregation was long fought and needed by women, and even today in very patriarchic countries lack of sex-segregation is a big point of pressure on women.

Race segregation was enforced on black people against their will.

So sex segregation and race segregation are completely opposite in every aspect.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Their side just have very male-centric understanding of gametes, from a perspective of a male body. While for women/females what I am speaking is pretty clear and understandable and obvious. We are taking this for granted, forgetting that culture is very male-centric and mostly promoting male sexual reproduction, while shaming female's natural cycles and trying to hide them. So we should not forget that males (and sometimes even females) have no idea about our realities and trying to judge us based on how they would judge themselves or other males. That's why so much misunderstoonding, they are ignoring fact that our body works differently to theirs, and that we have different experience because of that.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is formed once by our mothers, when they are pregnant with us. So only women pregnant with girls are producing ovums. And only once during that pregnancy.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, it would not. It is pretty male-centric position and complete lack of understanding of females and our experiences, and our biology.

Supporting gamete type is not same as producing gametes.

That was more of a educational post anyways, so you can have some idea about us and our biology.

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They still develop the anatomy specifically for producing only one type of gamete.

A little fix: "specifically to support only one type of gamete."

Full sex definition is something like "Female is a living organism that is grown with aim to support and/or produce large immovable gametes". it covers all species, except some mushrooms, bacteria and organizms which are cloning themselves (and even ones which are cloning can have sex, thought).

QT/trans: What would be the worst things to happen if the concept of gender did not exist? by Fleurista in GCdebatesQT

[–]VioletRemi 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

some people who don’t produce gametes

Do you know that women are not producing gametes?

We are born with all gametes we will ever mature and release.

Do you know that pre-puberty no one is producing or maturing gametes? And that all women after menopause and all men after andropause are not producing or maturing gametes?

Do you know that during pregnancy women are not maturing any gametes?

Do you know that menstruation is body removing matured egg which was not fertilized with extra layer of endometrium which grown to become placenta? And only after that new egg from ovaries will start maturing and later be released.

If "producing gametes" was the definition of sex, then only men post puberty and pre andropause would be sexed, all other humans would be sexless!

view more: next ›