UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-30-2015, 11:22 PM   #101
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Yeah but I don't agree with that. XD
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 11:25 PM   #102
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
Nor do I but I don't see it being something that is going to happen in a majority of cases.

Anyway, I think a lot of the controversy here is stemming from a lack of education on the transitioning process. I would love to provide resources but I really am not sure of any. Would anyone care to contribute something so we can all be on the same page?
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 11:25 PM   #103
Schadenfreude
Volcano Badge
 
Schadenfreude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Bar-hopping with Notorious RBG
Posts: 2,263
Send a message via Skype™ to Schadenfreude
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
GYuh no. This forum has proven time and time again that douchebaggery will not be tolerated. People can kindly check holier-than-thou condescending clinchers like this one at the door, particularly when it's clear that all parties involved are speaking politely and with candor.

tl;dr no one likes a white knight.
I wasn't trying to be holier-than-thou or condescending. All I said is that some of the comments made were starting to veer towards transphobic, mainly the notion that John is simply a guy in a dress and is a "colossal asshole". I respect a healthy discussion, but delving down into insults like asshole seemed a bit too much to me. However, I know that you're not transphobic and are not trying to denigrate the transgender experience, which is why I said accidentally. The intention behind saying words like "colossal asshole" wasn't transphobic, but the overall effect was starting to veer in that direction.

Anyway, I don't really have not much to add to this discussion. I just wanted to clarify what I meant and was trying to say that we should be careful. I probably should've picked better words, I guess. Anyway, I need a drink because as an Australian, I'm a borderline alcoholic anyway. I'm off to Schumer.

Schadenfreude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 11:29 PM   #104
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post

It might be passive-aggressively accusatory but I think it's not out of place to remind people to at least try to be a little sensitive, considering we do have trans members in this community.
There are only friends and allies here. Older adults with experience sharing their observations about how the world works.

Nobody has to like it, or even to accept it. But shooting the messenger is not cool, and feels immature.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 11:31 PM   #105
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerichi View Post
Nor do I but I don't see it being something that is going to happen in a majority of cases.

Anyway, I think a lot of the controversy here is stemming from a lack of education on the transitioning process. I would love to provide resources but I really am not sure of any. Would anyone care to contribute something so we can all be on the same page?
I could probably find a couple of sources on hormone treatment although my knowledge of surgery is extremely limited because I have no intentions of going down that route.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 11:37 PM   #106
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emi View Post
I know the reality is grayer, that's precisely been my point. Yes they are looking at it from a purely philosophical standpoint but its unrealistic and uneducated, and some of the things that have been said or implied have rustled my jimmies. I already fear going into the work force.
How is it unrealistic? How is it uneducated?

If you're saying, "It's unrealistic to expect a transgender person to remove themselves from their dream job for 1+ years while they undergo sexual reassignment," then for me the discussion shifts away entirely from TG issues to one of workplace entitlement or more generally entitlement. "Should someone receive full pay and benefits from a desk job that they aren't even working?" is a debate that is worth having. In some cases our modern society strongly feels that the answer should be, "Yes," as with maternity leave. In other cases our modern society strongly feels that the answer should be, "No," as with someone who decides to go soul-searching in the Himalayas for a year. I would argue that the soul-searching sabbatical undertaken by many a quarter-life crisis victim is no less important to their immediate and future well-being as is the transgender individual's active quest to achieve satisfaction with their body. Yet I think you'd have to agree with me that I won't find many working-class adults willing to argue that taking time off from society to go soul-searching means you should still deserve full pay and benefits from the last job you held immediately prior to going on your journey.

If you can't persuade friends who love and care about you that we're wrong on some principles or ideas that come up quite easily in debate, how on earth do you ever hope to persuade people who despise you or your decisions that they're wrong about far more difficult principles or ideas? This is a good, safe sandbox to start off in. No one here wants to hurt your feelings, and the forum is heavily moderated by friends and friends of friends.

This discussion isn't about winning or losing a debate. It's about having an honest conversation about the topic(s) at hand.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 11:38 PM   #107
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
There are only friends and allies here. Older adults with experience sharing their observations about how the world works.

Nobody has to like it, or even to accept it. But shooting the messenger is not cool, and feels immature.
I'm not claiming that there's anything but. And I'm not saying I agree with how it was put. But I think a friendly reminder is not a bad thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emi View Post
I could probably find a couple of sources on hormone treatment although my knowledge of surgery is extremely limited because I have no intentions of going down that route.
That seems to be the issue we're facing so I think that might be helpful. Surgery is surgery so I don't think we really need to explain that.
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 11:52 PM   #108
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schadenfreude View Post
I wasn't trying to be holier-than-thou or condescending. All I said is that some of the comments made were starting to veer towards transphobic, mainly the notion that John is simply a guy in a dress and is a "colossal asshole". I respect a healthy discussion, but delving down into insults like asshole seemed a bit too much to me. However, I know that you're not transphobic and are not trying to denigrate the transgender experience, which is why I said accidentally. The intention behind saying words like "colossal asshole" wasn't transphobic, but the overall effect was starting to veer in that direction.
I would have been fine with this entire reply but for the fact that you wrote "you're" instead of "Mozz is" or "Shuckle is". I know that sounds really nitpicky, but in replying to me with your post that word choice then makes it read like you think I wrote those things.
A. If that's the case, I must dissuade you of that mistaken notion immediately.

B. If that isn't the case, then what's going on? Why are you bringing up Mozz's and Shuckle's words but then saying you know that I'm not a transphobe? Shouldn't you be telling Mozz or Shuckle that you don't think they're transphobic despite their choice of words and/or argument? Or if it's me you wish to address, then shouldn't you be identifying the words or arguments which I used that you considered to be unintentionally transphobic?
You don't need to reply to this if you don't want to. I wish I didn't have to reply myself, but I do in this case because it would just really bug me otherwise if years later you had this warped view of me as "Talon, the guy who that one time said those off-color things" when it wasn't even me who said them.

... At least not those off-color things. ¬_¬
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2015, 11:58 PM   #109
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
I am still not understanding how any one particular business can be noticeably hurt by anti-discrimination laws since it applies to every business and it's not like clients can just go "Oh well we'll go to some other company who aren't affected by these laws."
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2015, 12:52 AM   #110
deh74
Noted homosexual
 
deh74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Praising the sun
Posts: 1,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
I am still not understanding how any one particular business can be noticeably hurt by anti-discrimination laws since it applies to every business and it's not like clients can just go "Oh well we'll go to some other company who aren't affected by these laws."
Most companies probably wouldn't have the situation Talon describes where the clients are directly interacting with a trans person who these people view as just some weird man who insists on wearing a dress. That's what I got from the example anyway.
__________________




PASBL
The Whistling Sound of Impending Doom.

deh74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2015, 01:25 AM   #111
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by deh74 View Post
Most companies probably wouldn't have the situation Talon describes where the clients are directly interacting with a trans person who these people view as just some weird man who insists on wearing a dress. That's what I got from the example anyway.
And again. First Schaden, now deh. Going to politely ask people to not attribute to me things that were never said by me! Unprofessional at best, malicious at worst. C'mon, guys. Search this thread for uses of the five-letter 'd' word and you'll not find a single hit for me. Because I would never have put it or even thought of it that way.

Just did the search myself and there's one pseudo-hit: the word was in Schaden's post that I quote-replied to. But I never brought it up myself nor would I have.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2015, 02:17 AM   #112
Selena
Aroma Lady
 
Selena's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,760
I would like to add that in the hypothetical John situation employers have some kind of right to direct the looks of employees. It's called a dresscode. Employees need to be representative to the company, it's usually something minor, like enforcing the men to have a clean shave, but can be extended so that John can't just show up in a dress without further doing anything. I'm not saying that John can't show up in a dress eventually, but since transition is usually slow but steady (not a lot of trans-women look like women from the onset), so too should the transition at work be. This requires John and her boss to negotiate on how she'll handle her transition whilst there, they'll have to agree on how she'll handle it. Usually this means that John will still dress like a man whilst she still looks too much like one, and gradually goes more feminine. I don't think it's too much to ask of John to not look like a "freak" (for the lack of a better word) or change overnight while still allowing the change itself to actually happen in a more controlled way.

The anti-discrimination laws should basically enforce those bosses to provide these oppertunities, so that they can't go "Eh, too much trouble I'm just going to fire the bloke." They should NOT give transwomen a carte-blanche on how to dress since cis-women dealing with clients can't show up in, for example, a mini-skirt and T-shirt combo either. They need to look professional.

Lastly it's not discrimination if someone isn't capable of doing their jobs anymore. Whilst John shouldn't be fired for being trans, if being trans severly cuts down her job performance that's an entirely sepperate issue and can lead to her being led off. However this has to actually be evaluated in practise rather then just being theorised and firing her "to be safe". Being transgender is a medical condition yes, and on it's own no reason to be fired, but specifics matter. Likewise a person working in a call center ending up being mute or extremely hoarse due to throat cancer or something just isn't capable of holding that job plain and simple. Same with recruiting, it's not discrimination to refuse an immigrant to work in said callcenter if they have a very strong accent. They just do not have the skills for that job in such a case. Sure it's a direct result of being an immigrant, but the reason they are refused is their language skills, not for being an immigrant.

tl;dr Companies can ask their employees to appear proffesional so no suddenly turning up in a dress, in return they give John the oppertunity to gradually change and don't fire her without good reason (like a massive drop in job performance).
__________________
Trainer level 3: 53 KO \\ 187 TP \\ 37.5 SP
21 win 29 loss 1 draw (17/21/1 Without DQ)

B- grade ref.
Quote:
Originally Posted by empoleon dynamite View Post
Shouldn’t the Hoff be doing something if he’s still around? I have strict rules about leaving the pool, and I’m sure vanishing the pool out of existence breaks those rules in some way :P
Selena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2015, 09:02 AM   #113
Sparkbeat
I make cryin' babies weep
 
Sparkbeat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,243
@same arguments being used against transgender people are the same employers used against women and gay people in the 60's.

While it looks similar on the surface, it's really not exactly the same. Back then, an employer would know fully well that he was hiring a woman, so if something occurred where he lost potential clients simply because she is a women, then he shouldn't be able to fire her simply for being a woman if her job performance was up to par, since he knew fully well the possible consequences of hiring a woman in that time period. On the topic of gay people, really the other employees and the clientele most likely won't, or shouldn't, know that a man or woman is gay since it's a personal matter. As such, it's hard to possibly lose business or workplace peace from it. If said gay person is going around the office and flirting with other employees, possibly making him uncomfortable, then he's not being fired because he's gay, he's being fired for not being a professional at work, which isn't a reason exclusive to people who are homosexual.

In this situation, the employer wouldn't really know about it until the employee was ready to inform their boss of them beginning to transition. As such, the boss would have no chance to evaluate the effect it could have on the work place prior to hiring, because it didn't come up until much later. And unlike being gay, it's both a physical and mental transition. So I'm not trying to say anything like the boss should be able to fire the person for being trans, just that it's a pretty poor comparison to make since its two different situations entirely.

And also agree with pretty much everything Selena said. Very good post.
__________________
FB Profile | ASB Squad | WF Quest Log
Sparkbeat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2015, 08:18 PM   #114
Schadenfreude
Volcano Badge
 
Schadenfreude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Bar-hopping with Notorious RBG
Posts: 2,263
Send a message via Skype™ to Schadenfreude
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
I would have been fine with this entire reply but for the fact that you wrote "you're" instead of "Mozz is" or "Shuckle is". I know that sounds really nitpicky, but in replying to me with your post that word choice then makes it read like you think I wrote those things.
A. If that's the case, I must dissuade you of that mistaken notion immediately.

B. If that isn't the case, then what's going on? Why are you bringing up Mozz's and Shuckle's words but then saying you know that I'm not a transphobe? Shouldn't you be telling Mozz or Shuckle that you don't think they're transphobic despite their choice of words and/or argument? Or if it's me you wish to address, then shouldn't you be identifying the words or arguments which I used that you considered to be unintentionally transphobic?
You don't need to reply to this if you don't want to. I wish I didn't have to reply myself, but I do in this case because it would just really bug me otherwise if years later you had this warped view of me as "Talon, the guy who that one time said those off-color things" when it wasn't even me who said them.

... At least not those off-color things. ¬_¬
I don't think you were being transphobic, Talon. You don't need to "dissuade" me of anything. I wasn't really addressing anybody directly, other than Shuckle, and I guess I meant the word "you" in the plural sense. I prolls should've used "they", but frankly, the key word was "accidental": I doubt that anybody was intending to be transphobic. "Colossal asshole" just came off that way.

Anyway, back to booze I go.

Schadenfreude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 12:15 PM   #115
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Quote:
I think you'll find that a large percentage of members here, even on very liberal UPN, do not agree with your assessment that you are "no less a woman than our female members."
If they do think that, they certainly aren't saying it. Which I'm thankful for.

Quote:
Many, many, many people see a fundamental difference between "male who seeks to be treated as female" and "female born and raised as female." Gender fluidity is a highly contentious topic amongst the general public, and the book isn't written one full way or the other even in academic circles.
Yeah, I think that's really unfortunate too, and its pretty damaging in the long run. For me, realizing I was transgender was a fundamental part of understanding who I was as a person and if someone were to say "You're just a guy trying to be a girl"...that would be pretty hurtful for me. It's acting like my identity doesn't exist, that I'm faking it and what not. I don't believe, myself, that gender and gender roles are something that has to be ingrained into someone as a child. They obviously are! But the fact that transgender people do exist I think plays against that.

I'm...actually not sure where I was going with this. lol
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 12:52 PM   #116
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emi View Post
If they do think that, they certainly aren't saying it. Which I'm thankful for.
There can be respect without there being concordance. It is enough for many that you say, "From now on I want to be called this new name and I want to be treated this new way." They will call you by the new name and treat you the new way. That should not be confused for them agreeing that your views are valid, nor should it be confused for them believing that your proscribed course of action is good.

Suppose a racist uncle who hates blacks. While you might not agree with your uncle's views, you might also modify your behavior when visiting your uncle so as to not trigger him. You might refrain from bringing up blacks in conversation, for instance. You might choose not to engage him in debate if he makes an offhand racist remark.

I think it's similar for a lot of LGBTQ matters. A UPNer might privately believe that homosexuality is abhorrent yet refrains from proselytizing the UPN gay community. Another UPNer might believe that gender fluidity is a lot of new age garbage but doesn't want to antagonize members of the community who identify as transgender.

Speaking personally, I do not see all TG cases as equivalent -- and on UPN, there are three TG cases I have taken note of that I assess very differently. I doubt I am the only person who does this, either, though others may assess differently from how I do. My point here is, it isn't even enough to say, "Either you accept transgender rights or you do not." I, for example, do accept transgender rights and do believe that there are bonafide cases of people being born in the wrong body. But I also don't universally credit all claims to transgender identity. Which is to say, I think that sometimes you have folks who are genuinely TG and are doing the right thing to not only identify as TG but to also seek appropriate treatments, and then I think there are other times where we have confused youth who mistakenly identify as TG at a time in their lives where they are hugely influenced by their peers, media, pop culture, and thinking behaviors typical of young adults. Even suggesting that someone might mistakenly identify as TG would get me shouted down by a good chunk of the community, so I keep those views to myself. Worse still, I am not an expert in the field and have only armchair assessments to run with. It's not my place to play judge publicly and to decide for all who is "really TG" and who isn't. But it doesn't mean that I, someone who advocates for transgender rights, doesn't privately believe that some people laying claim to a TG identity are doing so recklessly and perhaps erroneously.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 01:02 PM   #117
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Well that only reason I worded it as such is because I don't like to lay claim that I know what's going on in people's heads. My boyfriend sees me as a woman, but that doesn't mean that everyone does. I'm well aware of that.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 02:54 PM   #118
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
There is plenty of evidence beginning to surface that trans people have bodies and brains that develop differently from their initially assigned gender, different from 'usual. The research is s but scattered but evidence from some studies have suggested theories in which a person's mental gender doesn't equate to their assigned biological gender due to things that happened in the womb, brain developing a different way then the body did and vice versa, lack of crucial hormones or perhaps an over abundance of others, etc.

Here is an interesting study on trans people brain development, for example. While the study showed some very interesting things, it was ultimately inconclusive in some regards in that more research needs to be done, but some of the things proven scientifically backs up the argument for TG people.

When I have more time I'll be happy to look for more
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 03:06 PM   #119
Aposteriori
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son_of_Shadows View Post
Intersex people. Hermaphrodites.
Spoiler: show


This diagram has helped tons in a third world country where they are sticking anything LGBTQI related into just sexual orientation.

The term hermaphodites has been phazed out in the medical community. The term used officially is intersex, more specifically true intersex, vs pseudo intersex when genetilia is ambiguous, and not defined as one or the other.

Talon made a point much earlier in the thread. Gender is a social construct, and as such does not truly exist. It is man made. Gender Identity and expression is what what we are discussing in essence.

Moving on to trans right: access to medical care should be number 1 priority. We should have physicians fully trained to handle people thinking about transitioning, people in transition, and people fully transitioned. For many american doctors, it is an afterthought and sometimes not even pronouns can be respected due to legal reasons. Though, you can probably get away with a prior disclaimer "I support your transition, but for legal reasons I must read this letter in your birth gender" which could sting some people, and I feel for them.

There are many facets of society that need to change in support and we all need to make the mutual realization that it is not our job to judge one another if we disagree; their human experience hardly influences our own in the grand scheme of things. Each transperson will go through a unique path, and we cannot expect them to be normative of the gender that they are transitioning to, but we can respect them and be 100% supportive.

More on the topic: the reason aversion/repulsion happens is that people attempt to picture themselves in the process of, whether it is trying to picture transitioning, or homosexuality or anything that does not fit their norm, and immediately feel repulsed if they lack basic understanding: this is not related to the one perceiving it, and it does not affect them. Yes, there are religious arguments, but at the same time, we have phased out plenty of old world views in favor of progression and inclusion.
Aposteriori is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 03:09 PM   #120
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
There is plenty of evidence beginning to surface that trans people have bodies and brains that develop differently from their initially assigned gender, different from 'usual. The research is s but scattered but evidence from some studies have suggested theories in which a person's mental gender doesn't equate to their assigned biological gender due to things that happened in the womb, brain developing a different way then the body did and vice versa, lack of crucial hormones or perhaps an over abundance of others, etc.
Is it 2006? What is your definition of "beginning to surface"? Apologies for the snark but these are the sorts of findings that informed my position on transgender identity going back to college (mid-2000s for me).

The problem isn't that we don't have evidence of the sort you've described. The problem is ... well, one of the problems is that not all individuals who present as transgender present with the physical manifestations you're speaking of. A second problem is that, similar to concerns with homosexual identity, the reason for the "born TG vs. chose to be TG" wave-particle duality of current TG discussions is that we're dealing with two very different populations here but labeling them under the same name.
  • On the one hand you have individuals who were, from birth, raised as the wrong gender due to their phenotype. In plain English: the baby had a penis, the baby was raised as a boy, but it was clear even in youth that the boy was rather more like a girl and by adolescence it became very clear that the teenage boy was actually a teenage girl with a teenage girl's brain trapped inside of a teenage boy's body.
  • On the other hand you have individuals who champion the notion of "gender as a matter of choice," individuals who elect to identify as male/female despite having been raised female/male, and they elect to do so for any number of external reasons (e.g. social pressures).
Many people get hot under the collar when you bring up the second group's existence, but I think we're sticking our heads in the sand if we deny that the group exists. You can't really have it both ways, both the "I was from birth a woman trapped in a man's body" and the "I was a boy until age 14 but then I decided I'd rather be a girl instead." They're two fundamentally different groups who may warrant very different treatments.

The discussion is further complicated by studies of brains of individuals who identify as heterosexual and comfortable in their assigned gender roles. I've no studies on hand to show you as I'm pulling here from memories of papers I read in 2007, but there are documented studies of men who identify as male who have "female brains," i.e. the physical structures and brain chemistry seen on MRI that you're discussing that we say are associated with womanhood. Is this evidence that gender is a social construct? Is this evidence that gender is fluid? The evidence exists, but the interpretation of it remains contentious and (as far as I am aware) unsettled. Which is not to say that people have not formed their opinions and chosen sides in the debate. Just to say that, academically speaking, the book is not closed shut on this one just yet.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 03:18 PM   #121
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aposteriori View Post
Though, you can probably get away with a prior disclaimer "I support your transition, but for legal reasons I must read this letter in your birth gender" which could sting some people, and I feel for them.
Are we really taking personal offense at pronouns now? What about the Latin-derived languages where one of their fundamental structures is the division of "male" and "female" words? Should we all just start speaking Lojban?
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 03:21 PM   #122
Aposteriori
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
Are we really taking personal offense at pronouns now? What about the Latin-derived languages where one of their fundamental structures is the division of "male" and "female" words? Should we all just start speaking Lojban?
No, we respect the pronoun desired by the individual. It cost you nothing to call a person he/she/it/they/ze. The world does not need to be angry at everything, nor is it conforming to things they don't want to accept. Call a transfemale she, she wont be mad, and you wont make her feel uncomfortable. Calling her a he, that could possiblity, and most likely make her cringe, thus making the transperson uncomfortable unnecessary. Your own gender is not affected, and it is something that will not change if you respect other people's wishes.
Aposteriori is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 03:26 PM   #123
Aposteriori
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Is it 2006? What is your definition of "beginning to surface"? Apologies for the snark but these are the sorts of findings that informed my position on transgender identity going back to college (mid-2000s for me).

The problem isn't that we don't have evidence of the sort you've described. The problem is ... well, one of the problems is that not all individuals who present as transgender present with the physical manifestations you're speaking of. A second problem is that, similar to concerns with homosexual identity, the reason for the "born TG vs. chose to be TG" wave-particle duality of current TG discussions is that we're dealing with two very different populations here but labeling them under the same name.
  • On the one hand you have individuals who were, from birth, raised as the wrong gender due to their phenotype. In plain English: the baby had a penis, the baby was raised as a boy, but it was clear even in youth that the boy was rather more like a girl and by adolescence it became very clear that the teenage boy was actually a teenage girl with a teenage girl's brain trapped inside of a teenage boy's body.
  • On the other hand you have individuals who champion the notion of "gender as a matter of choice," individuals who elect to identify as male/female despite having been raised female/male, and they elect to do so for any number of external reasons (e.g. social pressures).
Many people get hot under the collar when you bring up the second group's existence, but I think we're sticking our heads in the sand if we deny that the group exists. You can't really have it both ways, both the "I was from birth a woman trapped in a man's body" and the "I was a boy until age 14 but then I decided I'd rather be a girl instead." They're two fundamentally different groups who may warrant very different treatments.

The discussion is further complicated by studies of brains of individuals who identify as heterosexual and comfortable in their assigned gender roles. I've no studies on hand to show you as I'm pulling here from memories of papers I read in 2007, but there are documented studies of men who identify as male who have "female brains," i.e. the physical structures and brain chemistry seen on MRI that you're discussing that we say are associated with womanhood. Is this evidence that gender is a social construct? Is this evidence that gender is fluid? The evidence exists, but the interpretation of it remains contentious and (as far as I am aware) unsettled. Which is not to say that people have not formed their opinions and chosen sides in the debate. Just to say that, academically speaking, the book is not closed shut on this one just yet.
Adding to the topic; male and female brains are shown to be no different to each other. They have been shown more to be a mosaic of we consider ideally woman or ideally man. So we are getting conflicting research in that regard.

A good guideline is basing ourselves on how the individual feels. We can't quantify it for sure, but objecting for the sake of it being different from what an individual might find as the norm should be no barrier in the decision making process of the person who might decide to transition.
Aposteriori is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 03:36 PM   #124
Aposteriori
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emi View Post
I'm pretty sure we have a thread for this (or it was just kind of pseudo-picked up for this purpose), but no, Caitlyn Jenner is not a man. It's not valid to classify her as a man either. Not only because it negates pretty much everything she's said on transgender rights and on the people who are suffering, like myself, but because it also hurts transgender people who are in a wide variety of circumstances. I myself can't transition where I'm at now, I'm strictly not allowed to, but that doesn't make me any less a woman than our female members of UPN. It's not "rude".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Going to suggest we table transgender debate for another thread, but I would just like to say:

I think you'll find that a large percentage of members here, even on very liberal UPN, do not agree with your assessment that you are "no less a woman than our female members." Many, many, many people see a fundamental difference between "male who seeks to be treated as female" and "female born and raised as female." Gender fluidity is a highly contentious topic amongst the general public, and the book isn't written one full way or the other even in academic circles.

Anyway. If you'd like to reply to this or other posts on transgender identity, I would highly suggest taking it to another thread. I can see the discussion getting heated fast, resulting in a classic Debate thread lockdown; this thread really need not be locked; and transgender rights has not been a major platform for any of the current candidates running for the office of President of the United States. 1 + 2 + 3, there's really no reason to be holding the discussion here. I get that it started thanks to a comment made by Shuckle in one of his posts, but let's not get derailed, guys.
Re: Genderperson

Caitlyn is biologically, based on her chromosomes, Male by Sex. However, Caitlyn is not a man by gender. She is a woman, who identifies as such. She is male to female transgender, who coincidentally has not fully operated her body to remove her penis. A man is not made by a penis, a man is defined by the gender in which he conforms and participates to. Male/Female =/= Man/Woman
Aposteriori is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2016, 04:20 PM   #125
Heather
Naga's Voice
 
Heather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: somewhere gay idk
Posts: 3,279
@Apost: I think it's also important to add that transgenderism comes in shades aplenty. There is no one true formula. Some folks simply present, some go through with hormones but not surgery, some get surgery to complete the nine yards. I'd ideally fall into the third group if I had my way with things, but that wouldn't be able to happen for a long time due to my parents' (my mom's more so) rigidity on the matter. So essentially it is very important to realize that gender does not go by the body. The problem is we allowed ourselves as a society to use sex and gender interchangeably, mostly the latter being used as a euphemistic term for the former.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy View Post
Quoth the Honchkrow (nevermore!).
Fizzy Member Post: Catherine Park
Heather is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:29 PM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.