Transgender issues
I tolerate (and wink at in a supportive way) Transgender people getting their rights and being recognized as their desired sex/gender but only for Transgender people with gender dysphoria (dysphoria includes having a lack of Euphoria.) and who either get either hair growth-removal treatments OR get hormone therapy, OR get srs/various surgeries (to make their face, chest, and anatomy to be more in line with their new gender identity) OR that transitioning results in some form of increased Euphoria.
My views on the Transgender people do not meet my above truscum conditions, can be found in this link
I believe there is a medical condition or aspect inherent to transness which is **gender dysphoria (or other terms like Gender Incongruence) Though I do ask myself questions like "what constitutes dysphoria?" and, "what constitutes transness?".
With ever growing visibility than ever in the media, I speculate that cisgender people (commonly LGB and/or gender-nonconforming) are led to conclude that they are trans instead of simply non-conforming to heteronormative *gender roles.
*At its base, the trans experience involves a disconnect between a person's sex (assigned to them at birth) and their gender. The term gender, here, means a person's internal sense of their sex -- or, the sex they should be.
For example, a cis (not trans) man would be content and secure with the fact that he has male private parts and a flat chest. A trans woman, though, would much more desire to have a vagina and breasts. This is due to the fact that a cis man has a male gender, while a trans woman has a female gender.
It is possible too for one to feel a disconnect from particular aspects of their sex without basically having a desire to have sex characteristics of the opposite sex!
Like, a woman with body dysmorphia may have insecurity about her breasts, even if she does not want a flat chest or male private parts
While this standard definition of gender is what I usually use, there are a vast array of definitions that many types of people prefer. Some people want to clarify a difference they see between "gender" and "gender identity". Some people are under the belief that gender is a social construct, and so is not essential to anyone at birth. Some people use the descriptor "gender" for social and cultural differences between the sexes, and not a person's internal sense of sex.
Another significant few terms to keep in mind are gender presentation, and gender non-conformity. Gender presentation is the method that a person physically and/or socially uses to present themselves, overall within the nature of their culture's norms.
For example, a woman who has short hair and wears hiking boots gives off a more masculine gender presentation than a woman who wears a frilly rose color dress and puts on lipstick
Both of these people are women, clearly! Yet, frilly rose color dresses and lipstick are broadly seen to be more feminine than short hair and hiking boots
By wearing clothing that is connected with masculinity (and the male gender), the first woman is behaving in a manner that does not jive with her culture's gender expectations. And so, she would be seen as being gender non-conforming.
The vital difference betwixt a trans person and a gender non-conforming person is that gender non-conformity alludes to the method that somebody presents or on their outside acts, while transness alludes to an internal experience of conflict between a person's sex and their gender.
The way I define gender dysphoria is something I constantly wrestle with. I cannot officially define gender dysphoria. Yet I very rarely believe that a person needs to hate themselves in order to be trans! I mostly define gender dysphoria as a disconnect between the sex and gender of a person, and at times I define it as the distress that comes from that disconnect (depending on the context).
I believe that a Transgender person who has gender dysphoria should get the legal protections below:
I support Transgender people who had or have Gender dysphoria being protected from discrimination by way of anti discrimination laws that legally protects disabled people from discrimination (DS 5 and ICD 11 and maybe GID) on the basis of Gender dysphoria being a medial issue. I support Transabled people and the Transabled movement (like mentioned here)
Such anti abelist discrimination laws should also legally protect Transgender people from discrimination due to Gender dysphoria being considered a mental disorder (but so long as a manifest diagnosis exists)
I do concede past misuse of the GID diagnosis while I argue for greater professional accountability. Removing the GID category even if it helped destigmatize Transgender people, it would disrupt the current, albeit limited, insurance regime at the expense of non GID diagnosed people with mental disorders
I propose that maybe we should retain the GID category and focus our efforts on legitimating mental illness and improving the acceptance of trans people, leaving aside the diagnosis question
I want to protect Truscums from hate and bigotry in the future and to have them be an integral part (if not putting them at the center of) the Transgender movement movement. I want them to be accepted in Transgender and LGBTQ spaces
I am an ally of Truscums
I am glad that detransitioners embrace ***JudeoChristianity since it is base seeing new people embrace religion, (doubly especially JudeoChristianity).
"Research has repeatedly shown that people of faith report feeling better and healthier. One of the most striking findings in social epidemiology, Luhrmann notes, is that religious involvement with God is better for your body in terms of immune functions and reducing loneliness." Stanford
***Though it was not a sin for them to have been Trans in the first place since the bible never condemns Transgender ideology. ***
But I also look the other way with and between empathize with and play along with Transgender women who don't meet my criteria above being recognized as Transgender and getting their rights if they convert to tradCath (traditional Catholicism) either religiously and or culturally (as in RedScarePodcast tradcath so LW)
I think that Transgender conversion therapy should not be banned since I am Libertarian and I against the state using statist methods to enforce morality.
Tucker Carlson says that the Transgender movement is 'satanic'. Well he is wrong, the Transgender movement is not Satanic, Transgender people are however benevolent, emphatic, critical thinkers, and problem-solvers who embrace creative expression, and seek to improve people and society
I am also against Transgender conversion therapy being banned because that would lead to a slippery slope that could start with bans that are mich less justifiable than Transgender conversion therapy bans but still not too over the top bad bans such as bans on exorcism and then spiral from there where there would even be bans on practices like past life therapy (such bans after that spiral or along that spiral are absolutely not justifiable in any way shape or form and flat out wrong).
If I was born in the 2010s, and especially in the 2020s, 2030s, 2040s, 2050s etc, and being pro Transgender and supporting Transgender rights was still a Left Wing, Progressive and Liberal thing to do, I would in those realities be more pro Transgender and more pro Transgender rights even more so than I am in our reality for my entire life and I'd be even more of an ally of the Transgender movement in that hypothetical situation than I am now in our reality.
Every trans person from our reality past present and future has zillions of clones of themselves in alternate realities who were born as the same biological sex and gender that those trans people from our reality became when they became their new gender/sex (Many Worlds Interpretation/Multiverse).
Some good and base insight on the Trans bathroom debate I agree with can be found in this post by me
I may or may not support the ongoing existence of gender roles, depending on the situation, but I am very rarely in favor of forcing gender roles onto any person
I tend to be supportive of non-binary genders. According to the official 15,000 member demographics survey, only 8.8% of the subreddit does not believe in non-binary genders.
I generally do not believe in xenogenders (genders like autismgender, catgender, or robogender).
https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/tz2z6q/demi_lovato_posts_with_a_caption_that_includes/
I do not support Xenogender people being recognized as a Xenogender or having Xenogender rights and I doubt I will ever support that based on what I know now. I will never refer to Xenogender people as their Xenogender (make believe) identity ever .I won't play along with their deluded fantasies. I will refer to them as their previous gender . More of my thoughts on Xenogender people can be found here
We need to fight back against tucutes and transphobes who drown us out. We need to contact tucute organizations and explain why articles that show the scientific side of being a trans person is so important to us. They legitimize the struggles of Transgender people and make life-saving healthcare available to Trans people
I think it is vital to change/better the Transgender community reputation. Cisgender people have no clue what a xenogender is, or that there are non dysphoric “trans” people. The war against tucutes and xenogenders is far from over, and how we proceed from here could very much effect the medicalization of the Transgender condition. We need as many people as we can get on our side.
Is it insurmountable? Hard to say.
Let’s compare transmedicalism/truscum idelogy to a different ideology. (Now, if you’re an anti communist, don’t get your trundle in a twist, it’s just an example.)
Communism was an immediate blacklist in the 1940s and 1950s—alleged Communists would lose their job, their place in the community for siding with that ideology. Nowadays, Communism is accepted, even tolerated in some spaces (and in fringe groups it is even celebrated). So obviously nothing is a completely a lost cause. How did they mainstream socialism? How can we mainstream transmedicalism/truscum?
We do so by appealing to groups that we pro Trans overlap with, the same methods that socialists appealed to/worked with democratic organizers, posted information and media, and tolerated dumb questions. I get that as trans people they are all super drained and explaining basic information to cis people is such a draining exercise, but it keeps them from falling into tucute ideology or terfism if ultimately go to the the wrong websites.
We all represent our given demographics. Strive to be the best you can be and people will catch
When people that don't know about how wrong tucutes are, transmeds/truscum do attempt to speak and reason with them. Commonly what occurs is they simply post something, and then they never engage with the transmeds/truscum, or when they do engage with us, they ultimately delete the post.
Its not like transmeds/truscum don't attempt to talk to them, overall they just refuse to contribute to the discussion in good faith since they wrongly and automatically believe transmeds and truscum are wrong and have made that decision before coming to transmed/truscum spaces.
So even if we were to bridge this gap, I don't see any path forward where its going to be possible due the fact that they will actively fight us regardless or like the one recent troll I saw simply t blatantly call us transmeds /truscums ablest and racist.
I'm not sure how you can find common ground with someone that outright is taught to hate you in their own community
People with extremist beliefs like supporting truscums will never change their minds.
Usually for the truscum/transmed debate definitions falls on “it depends”. A lot of people who agree that medical transition is needed for at least more than a few trans people and should be there for them for that are worth attempting to work with, though once it’s at the point where it’s completely about labels and pronouns it just is a lost cause.
There are numerous people who don't tend to go “full truscum” since there is a debate on what gender dysphoria 100 percent encompasses and whether a “full” transition is a prerequisite to justify using trans to identify experiences.
Some people can have difficulty putting themself on a particular “side” due to the intense debate around being nonbinary and if nonbinary dysphoria is actually possible sometimes pushing some trans non binaries away
Generally I’m far more supportive for the medical care of binary trans persons than to put energy into validating every single strange/nonsense label that the net now thinks is part of “nonbinary”.
I can totally say that due to my views surrounding the common ideas/perception of nonbinary and trans issues I sure as hell would not be welcome in any form of tucute space.
Although I support truscum/transmed, I understand entirely where people who find truscums/transmeds going too far comes from. Normally I only skip stuff where truscums/transmeds go too far (unless they make very fair points like how if the transition they are going get dysphoria) and read the other non too far stuff by them.
I am fairly accepting of all Transgender people. I don't believe that it is unreasonable for a person to believe that someone MUST have stark dysphoria to be trans trans reddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/truscum/comments/wsr12h/discussion_thread_what_advancements_do_you_hope/v
https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ here's one of her big posts. At the start of this piece by JK, it's sort of reasonable/normie, but as the post goes further it appears like she simply becomes a full on reactionary uninterested in finding out the truth. Particularly about the gendered bathrooms, which is a subject that I feel people simply complain about when they haven't actually given it much consideration. truscum
I disagree with so many of JK's concerns, but I think her concerns are not far off from being in the realm of being understandable concerns. And this text was penned after she was already targeted by some trans hate groups, so it isn't easy to blame her for having begun starting to develop a not-so-rosey attitude towards Trans people..
I think it is not easy to dismiss the concern of predator men in women's bathrooms is a not real, but disproportionate one. Stuff like that will definitely occur, and I am fully disgusted by the bums who would do that stuff. But those repugnant sex criminals are only a small, small group compared to the real trans people who would heavily benefit from expanding trans rights.
It's like hospitals. A few or more parents who have a mental issue called Mu(:)nchhausen by proxy, fake illnesses for their healthy children. They might also poison their children to get them sick, and take them to hospitals to invasive procedures and massive treatments.
Is it terrible that this happens? Absolutely. Should we get rid of all hospitals to prevent this from occurring? Obviously not, since hospitals bring so much more positives to the table, even if that enables people like this to abuse their children. Same goes with trans rights. There is a longing, but unfortunately they come bundled with some (rare) negatives
At the same time, do people think that the majority of women are comfortable being in the same restroom as a Transgender male who looks like Buck Angel? That's kind of why I don't believe the majority of people who have such a big reaction to that topic: just one question more, and the original reaction appears way too strong to be a genuine engagement with the world. Anyway I don't believe true predators are going to care either way about bathroom conventions.
Though at the end of the day, I do blame JK for allowing her antagonists define her position. That truly feels like the easy way out, to not actually digest any criticism and tweak your personal philosophy, but to use that as an excuse to run completely the opposite way
JK would have had a chance to peacefully reflect herself, without her allowing herself be provocated by others. Yet that's only not the way people work. People in general don't desire to listen to hateful loud mouths, even if they scream the truth.
It's been shown more and more, how angry orders simply make people more prone to purposefully break those orders, whereas a nice, rational discussion makes people want to listen. After the feedback she has received, Rowling absolutely has the right to perceive trans people as a threat, and though she says stuff like "I want trans rights, but not at the expense of women's rights". That's already very much considerate of her, a lot of people would have turned into full-on "I don't want trans people to exist" transphobes in her predicament. She can't be blamed for being a human.
When it comes to the pragmatic consequences of allowing people to change their legal sex, I agree with people like JK. Their worries are understandable, but not thought through. Yet that can't be changed with hate mail.
Some people would utterly abuse that system. Many trans people live decades as a woman before they transition, and they have to put up with a lot of really horrible men that they still have nightmares about. The extent of some people's sickness is simply unbelievable. But it's only a small portion of dolts in a big group of normal people, and we shouldn't inconvenience every person by bending our laws around just a few of rotbrains
We have to ask more from popular public figures in particular. Some normie person with reactionary beliefs is annoying yet insignificant compared to JK who will sway a bunch of people one way or another. She also has so many resources at her ready to take a moment and ponder about her views, or to ask other public figures what convinced those figures to get their beliefs. I agree it's essentially human, but it's also not good enough.
Of course JK has the right to believe and spout whatever opinion comes to her mind, but I do feel she reacted, ignited the nuttiest activists, and then ran away in the opposite direction. And for me, that's not respectable.
I think making an age limit on transition de-medicalizes it in a way. I feel that transition has to be prescribed by a solidly educated, competent doctor, as a method of treating gender dysphoria.
Comparing it to getting a tattoo and body mods makes it seem like a choice. No right minded person is going to become suicidal if they don't have access to tattoos before they turn 18.
I think that transition needs to happen when it is medically a must, be that at whatever age that is.
If a 12 year old is very very depressed, and has diagnosed dysphoria, they have to get treatment. As for surgery, they allow 16 year olds to have breast reductions when medically a must, not that top surgery is akin to it, but it's not unheard of.
Young kids, like 8, get limbs amputated due to disease. Transition isn't merely cosmetic, it's life saving, when it's a must there shouldn't be age restrictions. In particular because the earlier you get on HRT, the more it can do for you.
I think the comparison in child transition is made due to those restrictions being intended to prevent permanent damage. I primarily see it as a rational line of talking points, though it’s not exactly apples to apples.
The simplest way of putting it is that there are a lot of risks associated with medical transition, so we likely don’t want to just give (lazy example) a 5-year-old child HRT since the risks nearly each time outweigh the benefits.
Or at least this is just the concern, and then from that place it’s, what is the more sensible approach. This is being litigated in the court of public opinion now and in legislatures so these are the thorny discussions we need to have in order to make sure people get the best care as far as I can tell.
I am against young children getting SRS (I certainly don't want 5 year old kids to get SRS)
I am not associated to TERFs or their beliefs whatsoever. F*ck Terfs
I am getting tired of transgender people who speak like "they" is some stepping stone on the path to full revelation instead of being a destination. Many transgender people don't appear to realize when we say non-binary, we do so firmly
It means "I am not in your dichotomy" not " assignment incomplete."
I do not support the Black Trans movement or the Black Trans Lives Matter movement since those are toxic Intersectionality and I am against such toxic intersectionality
The reason black trans people are fetishised by the wokes, is because they're such a minuscule "constituency" as to be non-existent
Now it's just "pay into the mutual aid fund to help a black trans sex worker".
🔗 to my @❣views on Transgender issues can be found by 🗺 🗃 🏩 ⎗⎘🧭 to find link for it in this blog sphere
its a fetish ovarit reddit
Related sections
Feminism issues/Abortion issues
Ideology (Post left/Dark Mutualism)
Comments
Post a Comment