This is one of those issues where I personally think both sides have valid points - outing someone is not cool, but at the same time I think it’s a huge ask to pretend that Jane has always been Jane and never John, despite the fact you might have known John for 15 years and went to high school with them.
That’s fine. I didn’t know that about Eve and I’m not interested in dragging that up. I’d just as soon respect her privacy.
She doesn’t have issues, she has a subscription.
Outing someone is not cool. It would be good to be assured that you know it can also be presumptuous, rude, and/or dangerous to the life and livelihood of the person being outed.
Sharing information according to (in your example) the wishes of your friend of 15 years, and erring on the side of discretion when you encounter gray areas, is not a huge ask, and does not involve pretending anything whatever.
If you can’t take this step, your equivocation isn’t a reasonable middle ground, it’s just ZPG-lite.
I don’t recall saying I was aiming for a “reasonable middle ground”, just observing the fact there really are two very different and not invalid angles here - on one hand, outing someone against their wishes is Not Cool for obvious reasons, but at the same time, while I admit I haven’t met many transgender folks (because there really aren’t a huge number in Australia), the few I have met have fairly clearly been transgender.
That’s not a criticism or a disparagement, it’s a statement of fact. A casual observer could tell that person was born as another gender and so I think pretending that Jane has always been Jane is bordering on the “we’ve always been at war with Eastasia” stuff alluded to in the other thread.
That doesn’t mean it’s OK to keep referring to that person by their former name/gender (unless they explicitly say it’s OK) , but at the same time if I was at a high school reunion and one of my classmates had changed genders, it’s not realistic for 100+ people to pretend that never happened either.
I don’t see how any of this is special for trans people. It really sounds like some people want special rules for them, which suggests they do have a problem with trans people.
If my friend did something, and I know he wants to keep it secret, then I keep it a secret. The default with trans people is that they want to keep it secret. That’s why it’s called “outing” when you tell.
Sure, if you didn’t know that, it makes sense you might mess up. So I have no ill will towards the guy who probably was just being clueless. But, now that you do know that trans people generally want their transition to be kept a secret, why in the world would you want to out them?
What purpose does it serve? They look like their preferred gender. They act like their preferred gender. Why would anyone need to know that they transitioned? Maybe medical records would need to know, but nothing else.
The only reason I can think you would think you have the right to know is if you think there’s something wrong with them for being trans. Then it would make sense you’d want to know, so you can treat them differently. But you shouldn’t treat them differently.
It really is just like any other trivial secret that your friend tells you. It harms no one to keep the secret. So be a decent person and keep it. If they want to let people know, they will do so.
In this specific context, what do you mean by “pretend it never happened?” What do you imagine is being asked of the other attendees? And what behavior are you arguing should be acceptable?
Is this about, “If a Trans has sex with you and doesn’t tell you they’re trans…is that bad?”
All i have is a hot take. If 'stealthing is rape" Stealthing is rape by another name.
and lying about your profession is rape deceit is rape
Then “Crying gaming” someone is fucking well rape.
Of course, this has happened…maybe what? 100 times in the history of the planet?
Not calling Jane by her deadname isn’t “pretending the past never happened.” I seriously cannot understand the great difficulty some people seem to have with this concept. Do you seriously not know anyone who may not want to be reminded of something painful? If you knew Betty before she got cancer, is it necessary to identify yourself as a pre-chemo buddy in casual conversation? Or that you only met Robert since he served that stint in jail? How about an abusive relationship - is it necessary or kind to make sure *everyone *knows that Lizzy was a battered wife?
Not referring to something that causes pain is not trying to ignore the past. It’s basic human decency. Yes, I expect that something could “slip out,” but I do not understand people defending the idea that *not *outing someone who is transgender - to people who don’t know and have no reason to know - is somehow Orwellian.
If Jane shows up at her high school reunion, it’s a fair bet she is open about transitioning. She is presenting - deliberately - her new self to those who knew her as John. Hanging out at the water cooler at work (which is far more similar to the original OP as presented) - referring to Jane as John? Seriously UnCool, and* potentially harmful. *
It may be a hypothetical now, but, if you do meet a trans person in real life, and you truly believe what you are saying here, then I would assume you would act on these beliefs.
You keep on changing “not telling people things that are private about other people” to being “drafted into a conspiracy.” You’re not being asked to even lie. Just don’t give out personal information that is no one else’s business.
It’s no more difficult than not sharing that they had breast enlargement or had a growth removed. It’s not really different than not sharing their Wi-fi password that they let you use.
Keeping a secret is not participating in a conspiracy. It’s just respecting someone’s privacy. Other people do not have a right to know private details about someone else’s life, so you shouldn’t tell them.
No, it’s not about any of those things. You can go back to bed now.
Whew. Thanks. zzzzzzz
It’s part of her general persona. Sometimes she does post like a normal person, but the Zealot persona includes:
- I am Roma. Not only am I Roma, I am the person who defines Roma customs and beliefs for all Roma everywhen and everywhere. Everybody else must agree with my definitions and subject their own customs and belief to mine, whether they are Roma or not.
- Having children is evil.
- Adoption in any form and for any reason is evil. On the other hand, assigning a guardian is OK, at least so long as said guardian is a close relative of the parents and hates children (she claims to be the guardian of several of her younger relatives).
- Touching a woman without asking for her permission is rape. Offering a woman a handshake is rape. Any woman who disagrees with this is a whore.
You know, if someone had an eye gouged out in an accident I wouldn’t go around saying “I knew Jane before she lost an eye” all the time.
If someone had a limb chewed off by a shark I wouldn’t go around dropping that in conversation all the time, either.
You really DON’T need to point out even visible medical history all the time.
And, because few of us live in an insular small town, a transgender person living in a big city is still going to encounter and interact with a lot of people over time who won’t know that medical history. No need to bring it up because it’s none of their business.
The threads where Eve’s gender status was mentioned are from long ago and probably no longer accessible by the Dope’s search function, which only goes back 10 years.
Una post-transition looks fantastic, by the way.
I didn’t say you were either, just that you hadn’t reached one yet.
Okay, you’ve gone from “not cool” to capital “Not Cool.” Progress. Can you move from a description best applied to bogarting the last joint to something that actually describes the gravity of the offense?
Running this through the filter: you have met an unknown number of transgender folks, and you have met people who appeared to you to be transgender. There is almost 0% chance that these groups completely overlap. But suppose you were spot-on: what is it that might compel you to broach the subject? Do you have the same compulsion when it comes to things like pregnancy, plastic surgery, etc.? You seem to be saying that transgender people are always obvious on sight, so outing them does no actual harm. This is wrong for lots of reasons which are more obvious than you think transgender people are.
This is nonsense. Referring to Jane by her chosen, legal identity, and refraining from contradicting it, directly or indirectly, is not remotely analogous to state-generated propaganda designed to keep a population in thrall. This is a really dangerous way of thinking because it implies that both are lies (which is not so) and it equates a situation in which there is a moral duty to resist a narrative with one in which there is a moral duty to support it. So cut it out with the Orwell already
Good. As long as “not OK” is just your taciturn way of saying “grotesquely inappropriate, rude, and potentially disastrous financially, socially and physically, with no corresponding upside.”
Tell you what. You be responsible for you. Most of the other 99 will too, and the others can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Of course. I’m sure you (or someone else) is about to tell me that it’s terribly offensive to ask an obviously pregnant woman when she’s due, or if she knows the baby’s gender, though. Similarly, if someone I know has clearly had plastic surgery or a breast enhancement, of course I’m going to ask them about it - just as if they’d changed their haircut or were trying out a new fashion style.
Feel free to elaborate, since I’m honestly not sure how “stating the obvious” qualifies as “harmful”.
How much time has to pass for something that is public to become private?
I’ve worked in cube farms most of my life; most of the places I’ve worked have name plates on the cube walls. While they don’t say things like 'Cancer Survivor" or ‘Had Mastectomy’ or ‘Testicular Combine Accident Survivor’ & many/most of their cow-orkers may not know of their medical issues when what was ‘Bruce’ one day becomes ‘Caitlyn’ isn’t that kinda publicly announcing it to everyone they continue to work with?
I worked at a place where one guy wanted to transition; HR called all of the women into a meeting & told them that starting ‘Monday’, this person would start to use the women’s bathrooms & it was nothing to be alarmed about if they saw this person in the women’s room since they previously knew him as a man. When ½ of your workforce if officially told how is it not public knowledge?
I doubt there many people who don’t know what Anthony Weiner did as it was front page news mainly because of his public profession. Is it wrong when discussing him in 5 years(?) 10 years(?) to say why he became notorious?
This is not what people are objecting to.
During a casual conversation between you and another person, one in which Sally was not present, would you say “Yeah, I knew Sally back before she had breast enlargement surgery. Man, she had small boobs then!”
Or during a different conversation, would you say “Yeah, did you know Sally is pregnant?”
Or “Hey, I knew Joe before he lost his right testicle to cancer. Still a good guy though!”
That’s an “HR dealing with EEO/potential harrasment” thing, not a “privacy vs. public” thing.
We recently had our EEO training updated to include gender identity because at least one employee has decided to come out. There are something like 10,000 people in this agency.