The Left now says there's no such thing as a "woman"

[Revoltingest]

Agreed. We do have to consider people that are trans but have to be in the closet for one reason or another, they still deserve to have their pronouns and identity respected.

Also agreed that if someone isn't actually doing things to match their internal identity to some kind of gendered traits, expectations, roles, and so on (and boy is there a lot of vagueness and room for argument in there but I hope we all know what is being said), then there's some kind of disconnect in asking to be identified as a gender. I don't feel comfortable getting into that as I'm cis and have no idea what nuances may be there for trans people though.

I think we all know that people that use dumb arguments like "I identify as a helicopter" and crap like that are bad faith arguers that know nothing about what they're talking about.

We had a poster identify as a billionaire here recently.
I said he wouldn't really be one until he'd lived as one
for a year or so. (I suspect he wasn't willing to commit.)

 

[Revoltingest]

That is true. In my estimate I did tread carefully though in this instance though. Maybe I'd feel differently on a reread tomorrow, like we might with any kind of writing where it's hard to see things when it's fresh.

I often find that a night's sleep completely changes
the meaning of my posts. The solution? Don't sleep.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Agreed. We do have to consider people that are trans but have to be in the closet for one reason or another, they still deserve to have their pronouns and identity respected.

Also agreed that if someone isn't actually doing things to match their internal identity to some kind of gendered traits, expectations, roles, and so on (and boy is there a lot of vagueness and room for argument in there but I hope we all know what is being said), then there's some kind of disconnect in asking to be identified as a gender. I don't feel comfortable getting into that as I'm cis and have no idea what nuances may be there for trans people though.

I think we all know that people that use dumb arguments like "I identify as a helicopter" and crap like that are bad faith arguers that know nothing about what they're talking about.

I follow. I'll add that in regards to what to do about people who just want to be called female when male, on a site without making an effort, to use an example... is go ahead and use their preferred pronouns and explain to them about things and how you disagree, but not push it further, as some of these people do actually end up trans eventually. However, I don't believe in gatekeeping as it reminds me too much of doxxing and it sends everyone down a dark road, like the witch hunts, and for no reason.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

We had a poster identify as a billionaire here recently.
I said he wouldn't really be one until he'd lived as one
for a year or so. (I suspect he wasn't willing to commit.)

I'll be fair - if he can live his life as a billionaire for just a month, I'll be happy to call him a billionaire. And if he's a billionaire, I could use a new pair of shoes if he wants to buy it for me.

 

[Meow Mix]

We had a poster identify as a billionaire here recently.
I said he wouldn't really be one until he'd lived as one
for a year or so. (I suspect he wasn't willing to commit.)

Haha! ^.^

I also think this is why trans issues are different than these other issues where people try to identify as other things. One of the most difficult things to talk about are people like Rachel Dolezal (ethnically white woman identifying as a Black woman). People want to know things like "why should we respect things like gender identities and not things like trans-racial identities)?

It's very complex, and I feel like I'd have to sit down and type for a while to approach something like a thoughtful answer. But I know at least what it would look like: with gender, there are these historical traits, expectations, and roles that are socially accepted to apply to and come from masculine or feminine people differently. That's already a whole tangled mess of a statement to have to unpack as it is.

But the same can't be said for "racial" traits (Blackness is a culture and history, hence the capitalization): it's not socially acceptable to treat someone completely different because their skin tone is black or because they are Black on a social niceties level (in how we greet, in whether we open the door for someone or not, in what we assume they're comfortable with or capable of, all these different social things). When it comes to marginalized communities like Black communities, a person that hasn't lived that marginalization that tries to identify with it is appropriating it and essentially stealing thunder without ever having suffered for it through most of their lives.

This all sounds good, but it gets tricky: for instance, some of this stuff is the exact same reasoning TERFs use to argue against transwomen (that they haven't suffered the marginalization women experience through their entire lives, weren't raised as girls [because upbringing contributes to marginalization in some senses], and so on). But what I think TERFs aren't thinking of are the first points that I made about the kinds of interactions gender identities mean as opposed to an identity like Blackness.

So when people say things like "I identify as a billionaire," if they're not being snarky, they're also not quite doing something analogous to gender trans-identity. If people say something like "I identify as an Apache attack helicopter," they're just ******** that have no good-faith intentions.

Like I said, it would take considerable thought and nuance to really say something helpful on the subject. But I hope this little post clarified the waters even a little bit to anybody.

 

[Revoltingest]

Haha! ^.^

I also think this is why trans issues are different than these other issues where people try to identify as other things. One of the most difficult things to talk about are people like Rachel Dolezal (ethnically white woman identifying as a Black woman). People want to know things like "why should we respect things like gender identities and not things like trans-racial identities)?

It's very complex, and I feel like I'd have to sit down and type for a while to approach something like a thoughtful answer. But I know at least what it would look like: with gender, there are these historical traits, expectations, and roles that are socially accepted to apply to and come from masculine or feminine people differently. That's already a whole tangled mess of a statement to have to unpack as it is.

But the same can't be said for "racial" traits (Blackness is a culture and history, hence the capitalization): it's not socially acceptable to treat someone completely different because their skin tone is black or because they are Black on a social niceties level (in how we greet, in whether we open the door for someone or not, in what we assume they're comfortable with or capable of, all these different social things). When it comes to marginalized communities like Black communities, a person that hasn't lived that marginalization that tries to identify with it is appropriating it and essentially stealing thunder without ever having suffered for it through most of their lives.

This all sounds good, but it gets tricky: for instance, some of this stuff is the exact same reasoning TERFs use to argue against transwomen (that they haven't suffered the marginalization women experience through their entire lives, weren't raised as girls [because upbringing contributes to marginalization in some senses], and so on). But what I think TERFs aren't thinking of are the first points that I made about the kinds of interactions gender identities mean as opposed to an identity like Blackness.

So when people say things like "I identify as a billionaire," if they're not being snarky, they're also not quite doing something analogous to gender trans-identity. If people say something like "I identify as an Apache attack helicopter," they're just ******** that have no good-faith intentions.

Like I said, it would take considerable thought and nuance to really say something helpful on the subject. But I hope this little post clarified the waters even a little bit to anybody.

An awful lot of people create an awful lot of rules.
I'm always suspicious of that.

 

[Meow Mix]

An awful lot of people create an awful lot of rules.
I'm always suspicious of that.

I can understand; but rules are sometimes the consequence of nuance. Life is complex, made more so by being a social species. Complex explanations are sometimes required for concepts that are simple once grasped. No one faults anyone for wariness all the same.

(I am speaking generally, not anything particular to you or this conversation).

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

An awful lot of people create an awful lot of rules.
I'm always suspicious of that.

Well, it's important to understand the nuisances of the subject...

Spoiler

 

[Meow Mix]

Also keep in mind that people that are affected by things can talk about them at length by the nature of being affected by them. I probably talk more about feminism than you might for instance. And so trans people will likely talk about the nuances of their social situations too. This leads to philosophy, picking up and examining nuances and possibilities and paradigms and all of this. Marginalized folk tend to talk to other marginalized folk, it's how we end up with communities like LGBT+, things like this.

Verbosity isn't equivalent to bull**** in other words. It may just be passion.

 

[Revoltingest]

I can understand; but rules are sometimes the consequence of nuance. Life is complex, made more so by being a social species. Complex explanations are sometimes required for concepts that are simple once grasped. No one faults anyone for wariness all the same.

(I am speaking generally, not anything particular to you or this conversation).

I see it more simply....
People are what they say they are
unless there's glaring inconsistency.

 

[Meow Mix]

I see it more simply....
People are what they say they are
unless there's glaring inconsistency.

But then what do the philosophers among us get to do if they can't examine each nuance granularly?! ^.^

 

[Revoltingest]

But then what do the philosophers among us get to do if they can't examine each nuance granularly?! ^.^

I've long wondered what use philosophers are.
Although I like Majikthise & Vroomfondel.
They're practical.

 

[Meow Mix]

I've long wondered what use philosophers are.
Although I like Majikthise & Vroomfondel.
They're practical.

I'm too pedantic not to treat this joke seriously, so I apologize in advance. I think philosophy and philosophers are useful because we can't just define everything simply without questions arising and nuances that need to be teased out.

There, at least I kept my pedantry short. Here's a meme to make up for it.

https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-s...perfectly-sum-2-11540-1508344629-4_dblbig.jpg

Edit: No idea why it isn't loading the image.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm too pedantic not to treat this joke seriously, so I apologize in advance. I think philosophy and philosophers are useful because we can't just define everything simply without questions arising and nuances that need to be teased out.

There, at least I kept my pedantry short. Here's a meme to make up for it.

https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-s...perfectly-sum-2-11540-1508344629-4_dblbig.jpg

Edit: No idea why it isn't loading the image.

I find that ordinary folk are just as capable.
They only fail at making philosophy overly complicated.

 

[Debater Slayer]

We had a poster identify as a billionaire here recently.
I said he wouldn't really be one until he'd lived as one
for a year or so. (I suspect he wasn't willing to commit.)

I tried to identify as a billionaire and ordered a book titled "How to Be a Billionaire Without Committing Fraud" six months ago.

The book hasn't been delivered to me yet.

 

[Meow Mix]

I find that ordinary folk are just as capable.
They only fail at making philosophy overly complicated.

I mean, philosophers are ordinary people; and ordinary people are doing philosophy whenever they think carefully about things.

 

[Revoltingest]

I mean, philosophers are ordinary people; and ordinary people are doing philosophy whenever they think carefully about things.

What if we don't belong to the Philosopher's Union?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Edit: No idea why it isn't loading the image.

This?:

 

[Meow Mix]

What if we don't belong to the Philosopher's Union?

Death by 24/7 forced readings of Atlas Shrugged.

 

[SigurdReginson]

I regard hemophridites as a natural and legitimate third sex.

I'd be curious; how would you address someone who is intersex? He? She? It? How is someone who is intersex supposed to present themselves, if they are a sex all to themselves?