I did a quick search and I see TMAM in this thread and in one post in the JK Rowling thread. TWOW has more results, but they are mostly from some Game of Thrones thread, and some web links. I didn’t see it as a standalone having to do with transwomen, but I didn’t exhaustively search all 43 results.
I’ve never seen those acronyms before.
This is a bullshit comment. You are gazing into a crystal ball to bring up imaginary problems that imaginary “trans advocates” are going to come up with for a documentation change that you think very helpful for patients and providers alike.
Equality advocates aren’t idiots, they damn well know that your doctor needs to know the physical status of your body, and aren’t going to complain that a medical form allows someone to indicate both that they are a woman, and that they were born with a penis.
I’ve just been informed that the term is “allies”, not “advocates”.
If you keep reading the thread you’ll find that I’m inclined to agree to the three question formulation: sex (at birth), gender (preferred), pronouns (preferred). I think TM and TF still work to accomplish the same goals, but I’m not insisting on it, and what’s more, at least two or three people have objected in this very thread, as my crystal ball predicted.
Is this the objection you’re talking about?
That’s not an objection to using TW and TM as part of a medical form, he’s just warming up to start arguing with you. But please, show me the other people who objected specifically to the concept of a medical form asking for both identified gender and birth status, because TransWomen Are Women.
Once more with feeling…
How about you show me where I said people would object to “the concept of a medical form asking for both identified gender and birth status”?
The objection, as predicted, was to my suggestion of TM/TF on a form.
The preference shown was for a three part question, as was described by puzzlegal. To which I have no objection at all.
You mean this, that you posted a half hour earlier?
Between that and this comment:
…you have an odd way of trying to make your point.
Also, this…
You’ll have to explain it to me.
I’m still not seeing where anyone objected so far.
Personally, I misunderstood your suggestion, I thought you were adding TM/TF as additional checkable boxes, so that a woman can check off W and TF to indicate both statuses.
I now understand your idea is that transwomen are precluded from checking the W box because you’ve created an extra special box for them at the back of the form, where they can be kept separate from the real women.
Congratulations, you’ve correctly predicted that someone would object to a bigoted idea you came up with.
My initial thinking was that a trans person should not have to be limited to just the standard M/F choices that are on every single medical intake form I’ve ever filled out. But since biological sex is important in that specific context, adding two more boxes for TM/TF, would be an effective way of clearly communicating to the medical staff an individual’s biological sex and gender identity. I had not at the time considered the alternative shared by puzzlegal.
However, I did predict that some folks would likely object to my suggestion, ascribing nefarious motives, as you so helpfully continue to illustrate here.
Under your suggestion, does a transwoman get to check the “W” box?
If the answer to this is no, then can you see why this is noninclusive? Can you see why a person who perhaps has to struggle to be recognized by society as a woman might feel excluded by a form upon which she is barred from identifying herself as a woman?
If the answer is yes, then your idea seems very similar to puzzlegal’s.
I’m not a mod, but I get 8 threads when I search for “TWAW”.
Thread 3 again links to a YWTF post. No friend of the transgendered, that one.
Thread 4 uses it as an acronym for “The World at War”
Thread 6 uses the acronym TWAWKI for “The world as we know it”.
Thread 7 mentions “twawted” and seems like it might be vagina related or maybe not.
Finally, the last link is this thread where you use it for the first time.
I’m finding it difficult to muster support for your position that they are used by trans advocates in other threads on this subject.
Under my rubric, checking both W and TF is redundant, but not wrong. I agree that it accomplishes what puzzlegal suggested and that is why I have repeatedly said I have no objections to this approach.
Thanks for doing the research. You have confirmed my suspicion, as I have never seen the acronym before now. And certainly have not seen it written by trans people or their allies.
I get 50+ results searching for “trans women are women”. It seems likely that having seen TWAW/TMAM used here and elsewhere, I conflated the spelled out form with the acronym form. Do I need to offer an apology for not being sufficiently careful to distinguish between the two forms and the frequency with which they are interchangeably used here and elsewhere? If so, I humbly offer same.
I followed your instructions very specifically. It’s quite possible that you may be completely accurate and there might be a shit-ton of people who use some term like TWAW or spelled out “trans women are women” and many of them could understandably be trans advocates. Had you linked some examples, this would have been a short sidebar. Instead, you asked us to do the work instead and gave us instructions to do so. I did, it didn’t show what you said I’d find, so I reported back.
I think it’s in use by some trans allies but not widely.
It’s also used by those denigrating the idea though. And I see that more often.
“Trans women are women/trans men are men,” is a common retort to people trying to create distinctions between how cis women and trans women should be treated. It’s definitely something that trans rights advocates say, although I’ve not previously seen it as an acronym - I think you may be thinking of AMAB/AFAB, which stands for “Assigned male/female at birth,” and is used as a self-identifier in situations where someone’s gender at birth is significant, such as filling in a medical intake form.
What the fuck dude? I didn’t comment at all about the options on the forms. I commented on your disparaging use of “trans men are men” and “trans women are women.” You decided to present this as being an unreasonable position, and that it’s possible to not hold it and not be transphobic.
You even have an entire post where you were defending TERFs, saying that they “just” don’t believe that trans men are men, etc. So clearly you didn’t know why that was such a problem, why it undermined the very concept of being trans. They misgender. They treat trans people as either delusional or liars, the latter because they believe they’re sexually deviant and out to destroy “women” (i.e. cis women).
Yes, of course you can hold two logically conflicting ideas in your head at once. But why would you want to? It inherently means that one, if not both, is wrong. Why wouldn’t you be interested in knowing the truth? And why would you think that this truth has to be somewhere in the middle between the people who attack the minority and the minority? Why can so many people not learn from bigotry and apply it more broadly
The form idea? The obvious answer would be to have a place where you can check male or female, and then a separate place where you could check trans or cisgender. That way you don’t act like “trans man” is a different gender than “man.” It’s actually the same underlying reason why the term is “trans man” and not “transman.” Being a trans man is a type of man, not its own separate thing. Just like a cisgender man is a type of man.
There remains no reason to deny that trans men are men and trans women are women save for trying to hurt them. And I was hoping that I could get you to realize that. I even went out of my way not to react in anger, so as not to piss you off like last time, and you seem to have only gotten more angry.
But, guess what? I’m not going to ever stop trying. I may get frustrated, but that’s better than giving up.
I think you’re misunderstanding the intention of the term “advocates” in this context. “Trans rights advocates” and “equality advocates” are common terms for people who support trans rights and recognition, often without being transgender or nonbinary themselves. “Trans allies” is more or less synonymous with such terms, and sometimes “trans advocates” is used as a shorthand version of them.
No, nobody seriously takes the term “trans advocate” to mean that the person in question is in favor of “forcing” transgender identity on people who aren’t transgender. That’s another bullshit straw argument.
Wellll…
Yes, in this case Atamasama is buying into a bullshit straw argument, and/or just recreationally nitpicking semantics. I don’t think any rational person seriously believes that a “trans advocate” is someone who goes around trying to persuade more people to identify as transgender.