Gender Ideology Harms Children

[Melinda Rose]

This is blatantly offensive to trans people.


It is not bigotry to stand on the side of acceptance, and nobody arguing against you is being hateful.


Obviously not since you just stated that you believe being trans is a fad.


Nobody has personally attacked you or said anything against you as an individual, the only thing that has been criticized is your argument and means of presenting it.

1. No true Scotsman fallacy (No true tolerant person would ever criticize any aspect related to transsexual nature or happenings. Totally, false. Nothing else to say.)

2) Immunity to bigotry is not assigned to you because you are an alternative sexuality/gender fan. You are a bigot as soon you think that people with differing views are unacceptable and shouldn't be heard.

3) Composition/Division Fallacy (because I say something applies to something it is what is applied to all) There are plenty of trendies going for the femme/emo look and taking alternative gender and sexual stances for a trial run when they grow up they'll have the 2.5 kids, a new haircut and everything. There are also plenty of females who go male and start riding skateboards and dating women. They too go to the 2.5 kids, and get a new haircut. You act like these things are fixed points in space when there is no such thing.

I don't actually care if you like how I present my arguments, because I see that it is a comprehension problem and nothing more.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Right. And there's no connection between feminism and the gay rights movement, right? Sorry, but getting your history from Wiki doesn't make you an expert.

No one said it wasn't, but the point still remains that most of the general feminist movement didn't care too much about trans people until the 3rd wave. A lot of the 2nd wave feminists hated trans people and many of the ones who are still around are still being hateful towards us.

 

[Melinda Rose]

Both Transgenders and Jews can "hide" themselves. Both Transgenders & Jews are large communities that historically have been treated like animals. And instead of beating around the bush here, guess who else ended up in the Death Camps? Yeah. You'll excuse me if I think your argument is anything but moronic, because we saw its denouncement in the 40s.

This is a false cause fallacy, transsexuals have nothing to do with Jews in Germany and there is no-apples-to apples comparison. You are also composing and dividing here with the presumption that because Jews or transsexuals in Germany in 1940 are mistreated so too will be transsexuals in modern times. Germany mistreated everyone it didn't like that they happened to be transsexuals has nothing to do with what is going on here or now.

And what is my argument? My point of view was to clearly advocate equality, and whether they are trans or not has no effect on that idea. Criticism of certain features of the trans movement does not align you with bigotry or hatred for them. I'm sorry that certain people cannot figure that out, but that is not the case nor has ever been the case.

 

[Nietzsche]

This is a false cause fallacy, transsexuals have nothing to do with Jews in Germany and there is no-apples-to apples comparison. You are also composing and dividing here with the presumption that because Jews or transsexuals in Germany in 1940 are mistreated so too will be transsexuals in modern times. Germany mistreated everyone it didn't like that they happened to be transsexuals has nothing to do with what is going on here or now.

Which is why they never made an effort to single them out in their own camps...

Oh wait. They did. Pink triangle. With the lesbians & homosexuals. The "subversives". People who they thought choose to be said "subversives", like Communists, Socialists or such.

And what is my argument? My point of view was to clearly advocate equality, and whether they are trans or not has no effect on that idea. Criticism of certain features of the trans movement does not align you with bigotry or hatred for them. I'm sorry that certain people cannot figure that out, but that is not the case nor has never been the case.

Your argument amounts to "they want to change because that's easiest". Like they choose to be transsexual in the first place. Transsexualism isn't a hair colour you can flip around on a whim. No one chooses how they feel. You're trying to boil it down to something done for pragmatic reasons, when really nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[Melinda Rose]

@lovesong & @Nietzsche -

Generally, if your point is on this chart it isn't a valid argument. I know it says facebook, but most of this applies.

 

[lovesong]

@lovesong & @Neitzsche -

Generally, if your point is on this chart it isn't a valid argument. I know it says facebook, but most of this applies.

Yes, because we all must comply to a bingo graphic.

"Uses content from facebook" should be added to that bingo card.

 

[Melinda Rose]

Which is why they never made an effort to single them out in their own camps...

Oh wait. They did. Pink triangle. With the lesbians & homosexuals. The "subversives". People who they thought choose to be said "subversives", like Communists, Socialists or such.


Your argument amounts to "they want to change because that's easiest". Like they choose to be transsexual in the first place. Transsexualism isn't a hair colour you can flip around on a whim. No one chooses how they feel. You're trying to boil it down to something done for pragmatic reasons, when really nothing could be further from the truth.

No, the line of questioning was just about whether those considerations were possibly a factor. Even if that was the only reason to do so, it would be valid because there are qualities associated with being perceived with each gender that could be considered advantageous, would you not agree? Some people will see these features as assets, and what is wrong with admitting that?

I'm not even gonna bother with the analogies to communism, Nazi's, or whatever else you want to derail with. You can huddle with ld in that corner, and give her a hug for me.

I say that with no disrespect to any trans people here, BTW, I just think that addressing these comments would take away from their chance to speak for themselves or address the misconceptions about them. If you want to talk about undesirables in Germany during WW2 please go make that thread, and I will help you fill it.

 

[lovesong]

The bitter and hostile language that has been thrown around in this thread compels me to put my foot down. I will no longer reply to this thread as the level of immaturity has surpassed the point where I feel commenting further is only a waste of my energy, and I feel there is nothing more I could say within the limits of the forum rules. Before any of us face consequences for the increasing tension in our words I would like to respectfully walk away and resume a more positive mindset elsewhere.

 

[Orbit]

No one said it wasn't, but the point still remains that most of the general feminist movement didn't care too much about trans people until the 3rd wave. A lot of the 2nd wave feminists hated trans people and many of the ones who are still around are still being hateful towards us.

Tell me Frank: what do you call someone that takes $400 from a feminist to pay for their testosterone and then turns around and says feminists don't care about trans issues?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You've, in this very thread, earlier acknowledged that psycho-social factors play a part in being trans.

I've been stating that we are born, not socialized. Gender is a social thing, but being transsexual is biological. Frank even pointed out the finger thing, and I can add in my own position that my ring fingers are shorter than my index fingers, but also I lack an adam's apple.

If someone shows a persistent distress at being gendered in conformity with their sex, they are suffering and some kind of no true scotsman argument to erase them because it doesn't fit a political angle for trans acceptance is unconscionable.

I was refering to people such as bi-gendered people. They aren't transsexual. It's not a "no true Scotsman" thing, but a fact that they aren't transsexual.

I am beginning to see it more as a scene or fad based on the responses here, and how people are ganging up on people.

You apparently haven't been paying attention. What about being trans is a fad? That's like saying be gay is a fad. We are disowned by friends and family, we face heavy social discrimination, rejection, and are even beaten and killed. How is something that is life-long, and diagnosed as a persistent condition, in any way, a fad?

Suffice to say, since I can see no thinking is actually happening at this point we can conclude that any real debate is over.

There is still debate going on. You are the one trying to claim ad hominem, goal shifts, strawman, and repeats, even though these things haven't been going on. However, what has been going on is the two transsexual members who are also highly educated in the subject are challenged, questioned, and even though we have first hand personal experience with the issue of gender and being perceived and socializing as both, what we say is dismissed for things written by people who lack this experience and do not have the insights to know what makes us "tick."

2) Immunity to bigotry is not assigned to you because you are an alternative sexuality/gender fan.

No one is immune from such a thing. That's like trying to say black people can't be racist, but indeed they can.

You are a bigot as soon you think that people with differing views are unacceptable and shouldn't be heard.

Klan ideology is unacceptable. Hatred, dismissal, and rejection of homosexuals and transsexuals is unacceptable. However, saying so doesn't make me a bigot.

3) Composition/Division Fallacy (because I say something applies to something it is what is applied to all) There are plenty of trendies going for the femme/emo look and taking alternative gender and sexual stances for a trial run when they grow up they'll have the 2.5 kids, a new haircut and everything. There are also plenty of females who go male and start riding skateboards and dating women. They too go to the 2.5 kids, and get a new haircut. You act like these things are fixed points in space when there is no such thing.

You keep throwing these terms out, but you are using them incorrectly. You are actually comparing being transsexual and undergoing medical treatment to being emo. One is a fad, the other involves a core part of one's identity.

My point of view was to clearly advocate equality,

Saying we are following a fad and looking for the path of least resistance does not come off as advocating equality. It isn't. You are trying to dismiss us, have mentioned we try living as our birth sex, and it all comes down to a fad. That is not advocating equality, it is supporting the widespread discrimination and rejection we face.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Tell me Frank: what do you call someone that takes $400 from a feminist to pay for their testosterone and then turns around and says feminists don't care about trans issues?

Excuse you, but I pay for my own testosterone since most insurance plans don't cover it. Try again.

Oh, and: http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2010/09/why-trans-community-hates-dr-janice-g.html

 

[Orbit]

Excuse you, but I pay for my own testosterone since most insurance plans don't cover it. Try again.

Oh, and: http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2010/09/why-trans-community-hates-dr-janice-g.html

Tell that to wn

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Tell that to wn

What does he have to do with anything?

 

[Orbit]

What does he have to do with anything?

He's a feminist. And you know what he has to do with it.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

He's a feminist. And you know what he has to do with it.

Him being a feminist is irrelevant to the present conversation. Just like inclusive modern feminists like @MysticSang'ha are also irrelevant to what we're discussing now.

 

[Orbit]

Him being a feminist is irrelevant to the present conversation. Just like inclusive modern feminists like @MysticSang'ha are also irrelevant to what we're discussing now.

A feminist gave you money to buy testosterone and now you're dissing feminists. That's the height of distasteful.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

A feminist gave you money to buy testosterone and now you're dissing feminists. That's the height of distasteful.

I'm talking specifically about a very loudmouth subsect of 2nd wave feminists, not all feminists in general. The 3rd wave feminist movement is inclusive of trans people, yes. Back in the '60s, '70s and '80s? Not so much.

 

[lovemuffin]

Cis is normally shorthand for cisgendered. Cis or Cisgendered is a term for a person born with their sex matching their gender. That's really the only definition I know of. In fact when discussing such things people actually add on sexuality, because Cis doesn't denote sexual orientation. Like cis straight males, for example.

I actually looked it up, no where does any definition give sexuality or heteronormative attitudes as characteristics of the term. The closest I could find is that it is used to denote cisnormativity in trans discourse the same way heteronormativity does in homosexual discourse.

So what definition are you using?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cis
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/cis-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender
By the way, I always thought the term was merely internet vernacular. But apparently it's an academic thing as well. Learned something new today.

If you look at the Wiki, page, it's the second sentence: "It may also be defined as those who have 'a gender identity or perform a gender role society considers appropriate for one's sex'" (i.e hetero).

I do think recently in popular media the definition you are using is more popular. I don't know all the history, but I've heard the definition you use more frequently in the last few years. Just figured I'd pop in on this since there was some confusion

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It makes no sense to use cisgender to describe heterosexuals, since heterosexual describes those who are sexually attracted towards those of the opposite sex. Transsexuals can be either heterosexual or homosexual. But, cis- as a prefix means "on the side of," and the cis- part is followed by gender, a term that is not congruent or interchangeable with sexual orientation. Cisgender is a term that describes those "on the side of" their birth sex. It has nothing to do with sexual orientation, and further, there are already terms to describe sexual orientations such as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or asexual.

 

[lovemuffin]

I wasn't trying to start an argument. I understand the usage of the term you are referring to, and I even indicated that I think it's the preferred usage. But terminology evolves over time, and I was merely trying to clarify that it has been used to mean "heterosexual" in academic literature in the past. The only purpose in the clarification is because orbit was using the "heterosexual" definition and her posts won't make sense if they are read using the other definition.

To be clear again, I have no problem with the definition of "cis" as "identifies as the gender associated with their assignment at birth". I think it's a more useful and fine grained definition and it makes sense that trans discourse uses it. I think orbs should probably just use that definition going forward (at least here) to avoid confusion. Somerandom asked where the other definition came from, so I provided an answer, hoping to be helpful.