Thank you for your thoughts. I sort of agree with you, and wouldn’t have a problem with the plot points as described if JK Rowling had been silent on transgender issues. I’d also not have a problem with the book if JK Rowling had said what she said, but left the questionable plot element out of the book. But I think together, it is too much for me. I can’t help but conclude that the plot point is a deliberate jab, which is a petty thing to do at best.
I have some Armand Gamache books to read anyway instead.
What I said is true, though. Sorry, but I’m not going to stop stating facts and discussing the issue in order to accommodate your temper. I’d be happy to debate it if you had some arguments to present. Perhaps you’d like to address some of the many interesting points that have been made.
I found it interesting that people are happy to say Rowling is being unreasonable in her objections and there’s no need to indulge her feelings about the ‘inclusive language’. But we must avoid saying ‘biological male’ or ‘born female’, in order to protect trans people’s feelings. Also compare attitudes to the students who complained about their professor saying ‘nega’. I’m much less inclined to support political correctness when it isn’t extended to everyone.
…lets just be absolutely clear on what it was you said.
There are plenty of non-belittling ways you could have responded to that post. That you decided to choose this way has nothing to do with “being true” to your beliefs but everything to do with getting in the maximum amount of snark. That you would do that to a fellow former moderator, a well respected member of these boards, who was sharing her experiences on working in a shelter makes it quite a bit worse. Spice_Weasel has never found it necessary to always center the needs and feelings of males. And it was despicable for you to claim that she does.
There is nothing wrong with my temper.
I’ll just point to this thread.
And point out your ridiculous over-reaction to my post, the fact that twice you rapidly deleted insults to me that if I had reported you probably would have been actioned, and I think its quite clear that I’m not the person with a temper problem here.
You aren’t interested in debate. And this thread is in IMHO, if you want a debate then go open a thread in a debate forum.
I’m struggling to recall any “interesting” points you’ve made in this thread.
No other marginalized group demands that society deny who they are biologically.
Black people don’t insist they are really white. James Brown sang “Say it loud; I’m black and I’m proud.” Not “Say it loud; I’m white and I’m proud and don’t you dare mention my dark skin, kinky hair, and recent African ancestry.”
LGB don’t say they are really straight. Their movement has been about normalizing same-sex attraction, not convincing themselves and others that they have the same sexual tastes as heterosexuals.
Women’s lib never had women calling themselves men. “I’m a woman; hear me roar” is all about embracing womanhood unapologetically. Not demanding people see woman as men with clit-sized penises.
The transgender movement used to be like other movements in that they just wanted acceptance. Now it has morphed into something else. Society is expected to affirm the idea they have about themselves, even if it comes at the expense of the marginalized groups above.
I think trans rights supporters (at least allies) are skeptical that we’d ever be castigated for sorting these people into “man” and “woman” groupings. They probably think we’re being hysterical for belaboring this potential pitfall so much.
Folks like myself are worried that the pitfall is inevitable if people go all in on TWAW and continue to bend over backwards to cater to trans folks’s wishes. I think it will be really easy for people to go all in. If we accept someone like Alex Drummond is a woman, then it will be hard to tell someone who looks like Alex Drummond but wears a flannel shirt and jeans that they aren’t also a woman. Because to invalidate the second Alex’s claim, we’d have admit that we have reduced gender to an article of clothing (a skirt). Which of course is stupid. So we will say that even uber masculine Alex is a woman and quietly hope those silly old school robot ciswomen don’t complain about it. We’ll tell ourselves that even though Alex Drummond in a flannel shirt and jeans could look like Paul Bunyan, it’s no biggie since so can a masculine ciswoman. And we have no problems calling her a woman. Ergo, everyone can be a woman. No matter who you point to, you can find a ciswoman who kinda-sorta looks like them. And if everyone can be a woman, that means everyone is entitled to be wherever women are–so there’s much social condemnation waiting for the poor person who doesn’t get the memo and tries to block their access.
Sure, this is a slippery slope. But I don’t think all slippery slopes are fallacies When it comes to public policy and law, you really do have to watch out for cascading harmful effects. If we do X to achieve Y, we will likely get Z, which is bad. So let’s do W alongside X to mitigate the harm of Z.
If I could hear TRAs and allies proposing a single W to prevent Z from happening, then I would stop being an old school robot. But I’m not hearing any ideas. I’m just hearing “That’s not gonna happen!” and “Stop being hysterical!” Which makes me think of where we were circa February 2020. The pandemic-worriers were told the exact same thing. And now that we’re experiencing the harm, the folks who downplayed the concern are STILL downplaying it because otherwise they’d have to admit they were wrong. This is the situation I’m trying to avoid.
None of this changes the fact that trangender people are marginalised in society.
And you won’t even give them that.
It hasn’t morphed. Its literally the same thing. They wan’t acceptance. You refuse to accept.
Except you have failed to show that “affirming the idea they have about themselves” would come at the “expense of the marginalized groups above.” You’ve been repeating the same talking points in this thread for months. But its all scaremongering. People have been more than prepared to engage with you here to come up with genuine solutions. We’ve conceded there are issues with prisons and sports and that at times gatekeeping may be required. But none of that is good enough for you. None of it will ever be good enough for you.
I haven’t been driven from the board quite just yet, but I did quit this thread in the past because of all the bigotry and misgendering and accusations that we are delusional or will pose a threat.
The casual transphobia that gets thrown around in here gets to me, as it would any transgender person. I can’t be entirely objective when someone straight up denies that I am who I say I am. And having a moderator join in just points out further that it is perfectly okay.
I got into a similar thread on a similar board with similar results, so this is becoming more of a problem in progressive and liberal circles in general (while still being a minority of us). As well as a general rise in hatred towards us as the far right becomes more powerful. So yeah, I don’t want to put myself through the ringer any more than I have to. I have my own mental heath to consider, and it’s bad enough I’m still reading this thread, I don’t need to be even more of a masochist.
I am a woman, regardless of what people here think and say. And I absolutely appreciate and thank you and our other allies who have kept up the fight when we can’t anymore.
I just wanted to point out that this is actually pretty accurate and is how I see it. Our gender identity starts forming from even in the womb, but doesn’t really start to differentiate until we are exposed to the world and adapt to it. So I was assigned male at birth based on my genitals and chromosomes, but my gender ended up being different than what was observed, and I do see sex as irrelevant in the vast majority of cases (medical issues would be an area where bio sex is more important, imo), so I see my gender identity as far more important than my biological sex.
Caitlyn Jenner was a woman back then, but she competed presenting as a man, so she won as a man. I have a friend who is a trans man and doesn’t have any intention of medically or surgically transitioning, but he is still a man (and he looks masculine enough anyway that he doesn’t usually cause a fuss in the men’s room). But one thing that does throw me off is he still goes by his birth name of Maggie, so I tend to accidentally misgender him sometimes because my brain associates that name with females. I have realized in being a part of the trans community that there is no one path to being transgender, which is why I support Self ID.
…we all can see exactly what you said. It was belittling, rude, arrogant, snarky, and pretending that it isn’t wasn’t doesn’t make you look any better. You owe her an apology.
I’m asking this very respectfully, so please don’t react defensively to this question. I’m asking because I really am interested in getting a transwoman’s perspective.
Are there any folks who you would not accept as “trans man” or “trans woman” and thus “man” or “woman”? Like, are there any male-bodied persons who claim the “woman” identity that you wouldn’t accept as fam? Or is self-ID all that it takes for you?
Sometimes the truth can be subjective. We can say that “woman” is a social construct and it is adult female. Both things are true and reasonable people can argue which truth we should adopt as a guiding principle.
But some things should not be treated like they are messy and subjective. Some things really need to be kept as objective as possible. Even if it hurts feelings. Cuz hurt feelings are inevitable. We need to make some compromises. I don’t see why “female” shall be sacrificed along with “woman”. If transwomen can get dictate how we define “women”, then let ciswomen have power over “female”. This is fair.
You can come up with a long laundry list of adjectives to describe me and the position I’ve taken in this thread. I don’t care. But no one can convince me that removing meaning from language to placate a very sensitive minority is fair. It might be kind. It might be courteous. But it isn’t fair. Call me heartless. I don’t care. I only care about being fair.
Do you not get how repeating a slogan in response to expressed concerns over a political ideology makes you look like a brainwashed cult member defending a cult?
I don’t think you’re sorry. I don’t think you care about my feelings or the feelings of ciswomen. I think if you did, you wouldn’t be telling us who women are. You would be listening to us as a collective telling you who we think women are, and then you’d be encouraging transwomen to meet that standard. So until you start doing more of that, don’t bother telling me you’re sorry.
…believing that “black lives matters” in the face of expressed concerns over a political ideology didn’t make Colin Kaepernick look like a brainwashed cult member defending a cult. The “slogan” isn’t the problem.
You would be incorrect.
You don’t represent all ciswomen. I care about your feelings. But I also care about the feelings of the other ciswomen who have participated in this thread that disagree with you. Do you care about them?
I’m listening to the “collective” and that collective happens to disagree with you.
I’m sorry you feel that way. But I listen plenty. I’ve listened to you: I’ve listened to feminists who disagree with you. And the feminists who disagree with you have made a much stronger case to me. If you are asking me to pick a side then I’m not picking yours. I’ll stand with the trans-inclusive feminists, not the trans-exclusive ones.