The witchhunt continues...

[YmirGF]

Thank you! I think it's crucial to be able to make a distinction between one trans person and all trans people. Maybe I missed it, but I don't think the "trans community" voted for Dylan to be their representative.

In other words, being critical of Dylan says nothing about one's thoughts about any portion of the LGBTQ+ population.

B I N G O!

When I look at Dylan, even now, with the blond hair and ugly bleached eye-brows, I see a human being desperately trying to pass as a female. I see this person as a performer. I DO NOT see a w_____! (I have to be careful here because misgendering a person in Canada can get you arrested.)

That said, I think Dylan is not the problem, but he is representative of the hardcore superficiality of this movement. This person is a living characature of what a gay man thinks women are like. It's stereotypical drivel and has never been more than that. And yet Joe Biden thought it a great idea to invite this person to the White House. Good grief.

That said, I predict that within 2 years you will no longer hear the term LGBT etc... as all genders will be shoehorned into the transgender spectrum, making previous labels obsolete.

 

[The Hammer]

None of this is new people.

You just want to hate on people different than the easy boxes you want to put people into, and see the world through.

What a shame.

Cultures That Recognize More than Two Genders | Britannica

Curious about genders that defy the binary? Learn more about cultures around the world that recognize nonbinary identities.

www.britannica.com

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

IF they, too, are to have freedom of expression, I frankly don't think you can.

LGBTQ+ rights have been the result of more and more ordinary people coming to realize that the variations on the human, while not commonplace, are completely natural -- and also because, when they looked around, they occurred within their own communities and even families. If those ordinary people are cowed into silence, then there will certainly be a loss of some of the rights achieved.

And then we'll have to begin again.

I think most are conflating trans issues with all of LGBTQ+ issues. The anti trans position is based on being against transitioning kids and forcing people to believe things which are not true, such as Dylan Mulvaney is a woman. I don't see a real big push to ban gay marriage as an example.

 

[Debater Slayer]

(I have to be careful here because misgendering a person in Canada can get you arrested.)

Which specific law says this, and how many people have been arrested for misgendering someone in Canada?

 

[YmirGF]

Which specific law says this, and how many people have been arrested for misgendering someone in Canada?

Based on your phraseology you are likely fully aware that it is actually a violation of the Canadian Human Rights Act I'll meet you half way, ok?

This article might be helpful. It's from the Canadian government's communications branch called the CBC.

My hyperbolic comment would apply in only very, very extreme cases, but if you read the article you will find that my comments are not unfounded. One could be arrested after a circuitous legal route. What may be far more accurate is that if you misgender someone in Canada you may well find yourself embroiled with the legal system which is bound to be most edifying.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That said, I predict that within 2 years you will no longer hear the term LGBT etc... as all genders will be shoehorned into the transgender spectrum, making previous labels obsolete.

That's all that post deserves.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Which specific law says this, and how many people have been arrested for misgendering someone in Canada?

The one that turned Jordan Peterson into the boy who cried wolf when he found himself still employed.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I think most are conflating trans issues with all of LGBTQ+ issues. The anti trans position is based on being against transitioning kids and forcing people to believe things which are not true, such as Dylan Mulvaney is a woman. I don't see a real big push to ban gay marriage as an example.

Justice Clarence Thomas argued in a concurring opinion of the Dobb's decision (overturning Roe v Wade) that the Supreme Court “should reconsider” its past rulings codifying rights to contraception access, same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage. So now SCOTUS itself raised the issue, how fast do you think the slavering hordes are going to jump onto that bandwagon?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Based on your phraseology you are likely fully aware that it is actually a violation of the Canadian Human Rights Act I'll meet you half way, ok?

I'm aware that repeated misgendering can constitute harassment, but I'm not aware of anyone's being jailed for this.

Bill C-16 passed in 2017, six years ago. Canada is a nation of over 38 million people. How many of them have been jailed for such an offense?

This article might be helpful. It's from the Canadian government's communications branch called the CBC.

My hyperbolic comment would apply in only very, very extreme cases, but if you read the article you will find that my comments are not unfounded. One could be arrested after a circuitous legal route. What may be far more accurate is that if you misgender someone in Canada you may well find yourself embroiled with the legal system which is bound to be most edifying.

I'm not sure how this is any different from how other forms of repeated, intentional harrassment are treated—such as repeatedly calling someone derogatory names or mocking them in a professional or academic setting.

By the way, if someone repeatedly misgenders others in the abovementioned settings or other situations and only gets away with litigation that, as you said, "applies only in very, very extreme cases," they're having it quite easy. Try repeatedly and deliberately misgendering someone, especially a cisgender person, in most parts of the world and see what the result is—let's say someone routinely did it to conservative American men in the Bible Belt, for instance, perhaps including many who think misgendering trans people is "free speech." I think you're well aware that coming out with all teeth and bones intact would probably be a feat for that person, without any litigation involved whatsoever.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

let's say someone routinely did it to conservative American men in the Bible Belt, for instance, perhaps including many who think misgendering trans people is "free speech." I think you're well aware that coming out with all teeth and bones intact would probably be a feat for that person, without any litigation involved whatsoever.

Yup. Except this is America, and in Red states chances are this hypothetical person can legally shoot over and it and claim stand your ground.

 

[icehorse]

What I'm hearing is that the LGs (and maybe the Bs), don't want to be in the same alphabet soup as the TQ+ crowd.

Having talked to a few Ls, I can see why!

 

[YmirGF]

I'm aware that repeated misgendering can constitute harassment, but I'm not aware of anyone's being jailed for this.

Bill C-16 passed in 2017, six years ago. Canada is a nation of over 38 million people. How many of them have been jailed for such an offense?



I'm not sure how this is any different from how other forms of repeated, intentional harrassment are treated—such as repeatedly calling someone derogatory names or mocking them in a professional or academic setting.

By the way, if someone repeatedly misgenders others in the abovementioned settings or other situations and only gets away with litigation that, as you said, "applies only in very, very extreme cases," they're having it quite easy. Try repeatedly and deliberately misgendering someone, especially a cisgender person, in most parts of the world and see what the result is—let's say someone routinely did it to conservative American men in the Bible Belt, for instance, perhaps including many who think misgendering trans people is "free speech." I think you're well aware that coming out with all teeth and bones intact would probably be a feat for that person, without any litigation involved whatsoever.

Part of the problem though, DS is the expanded and nuanced version of what constitutes harrassment or gives offense these days. In an era where words can be violence, virtually any verbal interaction could be construed in a negative way, time permitting. Part of the bigger problem is with folks who do not pass as the gender they identify as.

 

[Debater Slayer]

What I'm hearing is that the LGs (and maybe the Bs), don't want to be in the same alphabet soup as the TQ+ crowd.

Hearing from whom? You've repeatedly linked to overly biased sources in more than one thread, so I would be interested to know from where you're getting the above and how representative of most LGBT people you believe it is. You said (emphasis mine), "[T]he LGs (and maybe the Bs)," not "some" or even "many." That vastly raises the bar for required evidence.

Since you cited an anecdote, I know plenty of LGBT people. A tiny minority adopt the position you're talking about, and their position is usually side-eyed by the rest as overly exclusionary.

Having talked to a few Ls, I can see why!

So your position is based on a limited sample, as I thought. Have you also talked to any of the numerous "Ls" who are strongly supportive of trans people?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Part of the problem though, DS is the expanded and nuanced version of what constitutes harrassment or gives offense these days. In an era where words can be violence, virtually any verbal interaction could be construed in a negative way, time permitting. Part of the bigger problem is with folks who do not pass as the gender they identify as.

I know that practical application of laws sometimes doesn't perfectly match their written form, which is why I asked for examples where anyone has gotten jail time for violating the laws in question.

As for passing, don't you think that what constitutes such is highly variable? To some people, not even looking indistinguishable from cisgender members of one's stated gender is sufficient; they will still dismiss a trans person as "fake" or "delusional" for not having a specific set of genitals. Where do we draw the legal line, and who gets to draw it?

I'm not saying any of these are easy questions. They're far from being so. I'm just opposed to the wholesale demonization and dismissal of trans people that a subset of political movements are engaged in right now.

 

[The Hammer]

What I'm hearing is that the LGs (and maybe the Bs), don't want to be in the same alphabet soup as the TQ+ crowd.

Having talked to a few Ls, I can see why!

There's a B here who doesn't care. Treat all people like people. Regardless of what they present as, or what pronouns they prefer.

 

[YmirGF]

I know that practical application of laws sometimes doesn't perfectly match their written form, which is why I asked for examples where anyone has gotten jail time for violating the laws in question.

As for passing, don't you think that what constitutes such is highly variable? To some people, not even looking indistinguishable from cisgender members of one's stated gender is sufficient; they will still dismiss a trans person as "fake" or "delusional" for not having a specific set of genitals. Where do we draw the legal line, and who gets to draw it?

I'm not saying any of these are easy questions. They're far from being so. I'm just opposed to the wholesale demonization and dismissal of trans people that a subset of political movements are engaged in right now.

Surpriingly, DS, I agree with much of this. Indeed. Who decides these questions? Elected officials. In Canada our elected officials went down ideoligical lines and simply imposed Bill C-16. To answer your question about how many people have been arrested. I believe the number is zero but does that not also make this particular Bill all the more ridiculous? It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist in the real world, but Emperor Trudeau can pat himself on the back as he prepares for another evening of performative blackface.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What I'm hearing is that the LGs (and maybe the Bs), don't want to be in the same alphabet soup as the TQ+ crowd.

Having talked to a few Ls, I can see why!

Yeah? Nothing new and the opinion isn't universally held.

 

[Father Heathen]

(I have to be careful here because misgendering a person in Canada can get you arrested.)

But then you did so anyway in the following sentence?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But then you did so anyway in the following sentence?

Yes. Yes, he did.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Thank you! I think it's crucial to be able to make a distinction between one trans person and all trans people. Maybe I missed it, but I don't think the "trans community" voted for Dylan to be their representative.

Very true! No person should be the single representative of a group. That said, it seems like the people boycotting Bud Light over this are the ones that appointed Dylan as a representative.

In other words, being critical of Dylan says nothing about one's thoughts about any portion of the LGBTQ+ population.

I think that depends on the criticism. It feels somehow that being critical of Dylan becomes apologetic for conservatives who don't want to be labeled transphobic, anti-trans, or anti-LGBTQ+. I say this because the boycotts against her aren't being done because conservatives don't think Dylan is a good representation of the LGBTQ+ community, they are boycotting Bud Light and other companies over Dylan because they are anti-trans. So saying that the boycott is not transphobic, anti-trans, or anti-LGBTQ+ because she doesn't represent the community is insincere.

(I have to be careful here because misgendering a person in Canada can get you arrested.)

You may want to edit a few of the pronouns in the post then. ;-)