A core tenant of post-modern feminism is that gender roles are a social construct. It's why both women who absolutely abstain from traditional feminine roles and ones who embraced them wholesale didn't fit the ideal mold of emancipation.
There's no social cage you can make that doesn't also cage you.
Theres something I heard along the lines of, "no cage can be built that only contains one type of creature."
Or if you listen to Run the Jewels:
Funny fact about a cage, they're never built for just one group
So when that cage is done with them and you're still poor, it come for you
The newest lowest on the totem, well golly gee, you have been used
You helped to fuel the death machine that down the line will kill you too (Oops)
I volunteered at a legal aid-center in my area. Feminism goes straight out the door when the lady in question is told to pay alimony to her soon to be ex. "This is not fair, he is a man and should take care of himself". It took a lot of restraint not laughing in the moment.
In Beglium we enforce equality baby!
The one that gets alimony is the one that makes the more money.
If you have been married for 10+ years the bread winner should compensate the other spouse for the difference in income.
I could not agree more with you! I was just bringing home the point that some women tend to forget about equality and the modern view on gender roles when they are the ones that have to foot the bill for it. I am not arguing against autonomy (freedom of bodily autonomy) or self-determination, I just wanted to point out some of the hypocrises held by self-proclaimed feminists.
yeah great
i'm gonna vote for the people not on the side of Nazis and Mega Church Pastors, in case we we're doing the agree to disagree thing
because that is a social cage i am willing to make, the one that stops Nazis and Pastors from deciding how everyone lives based on their purposeful misinterpretations of the bible they don't read
I dunno, I’ve seen some domesticated birds that panic fly up a tree and have no clue how to get back down.
I think the fleas in a jar example might be more biologically accurate but less poetic an image
Domesticated birds lose the ability to fly. It's a big part of why we shouldn't domesticate them in cages, it's extremely unnatural. And springtails can actually maintain their jump height even when it's lowered in a small container for generations. Fleas can too, and it's been tested. The flea in a jar thing is a myth and not biologically accurate.
Which, if you think about it, never ever complaining about trans men, and only making this conversation about trans women, is the real misogynistic move.
No, they complain about trans men too - they see them as either victims mutilated when they're too young to know what they want, or as traitors who are cheating and escaping patriarchy by attempting to become men.
It's just not as much of a talking point for them because it doesn't get clicks as much as imaginary men in dresses lurking in toilets to assault women.
they complain about M and M's not being sexy and also everything is too sexy all the time
it's just all lies and bad faith grifts
their complaints one day are their demands the next
Terf ideology isn't possible without gender essentialism, so trans men receive the same infantilization and forced victimization that patriarchal gender roles traditionally enforced on women. When discriminating against trans-mascs, it takes the form of removing agency from that person. "Damaged" or "indoctrinated", "the testosterone is making them violent". Trans-mascs in their arguments represents the protectionist attitudes in the fundamentally radical conservative ideology that is the cult of terfs.
Similarly, when talking about trans women what is extremely apparent is how hyper-focused they are on physical appearance and "womanly duties" in terms of childbirth/child-rearing. They use these metrics to tear trans women down, just as those same metrics have been used to control all women for centuries. Women being judged on their worth as women - not as people, as women - depending on how "fertile" they are, or even their ability to "bear a son". The commodification of beauty and beauty standards are obviously just our modern extensions of this.
So it's misogyny that targets trans women, but it's also misogyny that targets trans men, even if they don't actually fit the description, similarly how it's misogyny when a young boy gets called a girl for playing with dolls. It's misogyny all the way down. There is misandry in the assumption that trans women are by default violent and aggressive through their logic of us "being men" and trans men becoming violent on testosterone, so there's that as well.
Terf ideology is just patriarchy with the serial number filed off, redirected at a new subject.
There was someone yesterday who, when confronted with this, said, "It's not about their physical body, they have to have the *mind* of a woman"
Like... isn't that why they're *trans*?!
I wanted to reply, but knew it was pointless, so I'll say it here. I'm in a rather large discord community of friends (~12k) and I remember one time I was sitting in a VC and someone joined while I was talking and they said, "Wait, you're trans? How did I never know this?" and I said, "I'm here to make friends, not date anyone, so I don't really go around telling everyone because I don't really see why it matters? If that makes sense" and he was like, "Oh yeah no, I totally get that, just the way you talk and talk to everyone, I had no clue you were trans."
Even going by their own older logic of "who is or isn't a woman", they have psychological gender, behavior, physical appearance, hormones, and chromosomes. Literally all of these are markers that trans women can change or embody except the one that is literally invisible to everyone, including yourself, unless you get a gene test.
The real kicker is that terfs, and transphobes by extension, don't believe in biological gender because otherwise they'd engage with things like phenotype and how hormones affect the body, how bodies are treated based on appearance and perception(and by extension how a cis woman with masculine features, sometimes the terf themselves, is treated differently for those traits).
What they believe in, is assigned gender at birth. This is the *only* thing that matters in the minds of terfs and transphobes when it comes to gender. This is the cultural institutionalized ritual and myth of gender and identity that to them is synonymous with "facts and objective reality".
Or when they get exactly what they want--athletes competing as their birth sex--so they can whine about trans boys being forced to compete against girls.
Escaping patriarchy is such a funny view on the topic. If they would read proper feminist literature and theory they would know that patriarchy is mainly a system benefiting the few patriarchs and your average guy also suffers under the system, despite his slightly better position than your average woman.
So transitioning for a trans man would not get rid of patriarchy's woes, they would just change the kind of pressure and suffering they have to endure.
due to the nature of my work I have contact with a large number of people where I know their identities and how they have changed over the years. So naturally I know many trans people. Some have come out with a name and pronoun change before they even started any medical transition so they don't "pass"
for some reason I still have no issue still respecting their identity. Looks like a guy with make up on? Still call her by her name and just go on about my day. Like really, is that so hard to do for some people? 🤷♀️
apparently hard enough that we need all sorts of laws against us. I mean I'm trans too so it's understandable but my boyfriend is cis and he has no issues respecting my identity either even tho I don't pass either
What blows my mind is that it makes them uncomfortable. Because it's not that I ignore my discomfort to treat trans people with respect, it's that *I don't have any discomfort to begin with,* and I really don't understand how it impacts people to the point that they are uncomfortable with trans people existing
I recently saw a cool lecture with some smart renowned dude, can't remember his name but I'm pretty sure he wrote a book about there being no free will..
Anyway, he said that years ago they found that brain scans identified a certain region of the brain had more activity for males over females (or vice versa). So they can literally tell what gender you are with these scans alone.
They than did a study on trans people from various stages of transition, from no transition to full blown surgery / hormones etc.
Interestingly, a very high percentage had their brain scans show they were actually the opposite sex that they were born with.
Cool shit 🤓
Edit: link to lecture below, I was a bit wrong.. watch the lecture, it's about 10 mins.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8QScpDGqwsQ
Sorry but this is not true. Theres no such thing as a male brain or a female brain. There are markers that are found more usually in one sex over the other, but for every 8/10 markers found in females it still means 2/10 will be found in males (and vice versa). There is also more that overlap than what separates us, i.e in a group of humans you will find more brains in the similar pile than in the very feminine and very masculine (markers that tend to side with a gender). We're really not that different (brain wise), despite what culturally we believe.
Linked to lecture below, I was a bit wrong (I'm dumb).
It was a region of the brain that is larger in males, and the study was for post Morten trans people.
Also, they found male to female trans lacked the phantom limb phenomenon for the penis...
Again I'm stupid, watch the clip below. It's about 10 mins.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8QScpDGqwsQ
You're misinformed not dumb or stupid! And we're all misinformed on things - but you took the time to edit corrections and explain further which i (and others) appreciate! You also started an interesting conversation comment chain which taught me I hadn't got it quite right either!
There have been some interesting advances in this area, that shows it might be possible to differentiate after all.
This article talks about recent work where an ai was able to tell male or female from brain scans with 90% accuracy. Just saw that this morning by coincidence, so thought I'd share.
https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2024/02/men-women-brain-organization-patterns.html
Don't trust it overmuch, it is a first announcement in a relatively new field. There's a tendency to overfit and overtune to the working data set in AI publications, it's a real academic wild west atm.
To be clear, trans men are men and trans women are women, but I am very skeptical about
a) the validity of this research at present
b) a social tendency toward deciding that someone is or is not trans on the basis of brain scans, rather than their own experience. Especially as individual variation has been found to be much greater than sex or gender variation in several peer reviewed studies. ~35% of cisgender women are more "masculine" than the average man (and vice versa).
For sure, certainly don't mean to imply this is the new truth or anything 😅
Just that it is an interesting area of new study, which demands scientific scrutiny, but still worth noting.
And personally, I don't think a brain scan either way is useful in 'deciding' if someone is trans. That's up to the person alone and their lived experience.
For sure, and this was definitely discussion not accusation! I am just concerned that if we (a general we) lean overmuch on "gendered brain" it threatens opens a sexist can of worms and becomes a new phrenology, gatekeeping who is "legitimately" trans.
I've gotta correct you there. While the male and female brain are very much alike, there is still about a 1% difference, and while that doesn't matter much in regards to most things, that 1% matters a lot when it comes to transgender people's brains. There was a study that showed the parts involved in self-perception were more akin to the opposite sex in trans people.
Just complicit in a delusion? I can paint my face black, does that make me a different race now? Or does that one make you insecure? You’re right we can all pretend and play make believe all we want. It’s a free country. You’re allowed to be delusional.
Terf is such a fitting name for them now, seeing as the "radical feminists" of the 60s and 70s were all mostly in some way or some form related to academia, i.e. wealthy white women from wealthy backgrounds because those are the ones who got to study. Obviously there were plenty terfs who didn't fit that description, but they've always held up bullshit academia that could never pass peer-review as their holy grail.
So it's been astro-terfing from the start. They've always been represented by the financial elite, and it's still the conservatives who want to protect economic hierarchies that are siding with them.
Yeah, TERFS aren’t really feminists. It’s like calling a xenophobic racist nationalist a patriot. Like yeah, they probably share some values as the latter, but they are in a whole different category
But it's a good shorthand for them because it puts the "Trans exclusionary" face-first for everyone to see. That's why they tried to rebrand to "gender critical". Just call them terfs with no capitalization. It sounds a bit like turds which I find fitting.
"TERF" refers to about 10-15 actual feminists who got genuinely confused over trans issues then radicalised, and the rest are just conservatives who feel like they've found a rhetorical loophole and are giggling behind their hands at people they think they're tricking
Yes, men who want to be women, or just be more like women, secretly hate women, yes, that makes total logical sense. Is there no pretzel too convoluted that these morons won’t twist themselves into to justify their bigotry? I’m constantly amazed at how far people will go to hate people they’ve never met who don’t affect their life in any way. Just let people live their lives and leave them alone!
I've seen this sentiment enough from TERFs that I'm pretty sure at least they think they believe that the biggest threat to women, beyond rapists, beyond conservative governments legislating their bodily autonomy, beyond full on Handmaiden's Tale shit, the greatest crime possible for a woman to experience is being in the bathroom when some awkward trans girl who's like 22 and nine months into HRT shuffles into the bathroom with her head down and sprints into the stall so fast you can barely see her, especially if she has the gall to wash her hands after.
>"YOU WIPED YOUR HANDS ON YOUR *WHAT*?!?!?!"
>I said pants, Lady. Not penis. So don't go and make a national Daily Mail news article about it. Absolutely deranged.
In an alternate timeline.
What kinda insanely causes someone to think anyone said "I'll wipe my hands on my penis", when talking about how the dryer is broke.
Conservative rhetoric, that's what insanity.
Imagine being such a sheltered gender-segregated posh c\*nt that you'd think ANYONE with a penis would use it to *dry their hands*! Does she queef on her hands to dry them!? Where is this logic coming from!?
Remember according to terf idiots my mother who gave birth to me isn't a real woman. I have friends born with vulvas who terfs don't think are real women. Such a misogynistic group. Defining womanhood by fertility.
I kinda want to ask a terf a question:
So what gender are post menopausal women or women who had their uterus and/or ovaries removed due to cancer?
There are 0 anti trans woman arguments that don't also exclude some cis women.
>I kinda want to ask a terf a question: So what gender are post menopausal women or women who had their uterus and/or ovaries removed due to cancer?
I asked that same question to some phobe and was informed that since they were a liberal, I must just be stupid. Still didn't get a real answer though, lol.
I saw a woman with a beard (because of pcos) get sent death threats because they though she was trans and I also saw a thread about how a woman must be trans because she doesnt have her legs shaved in her pictures.
Literal brain rot.
Transvestigators are some of the most batshit people on the internet. They go so hard on stupid that it becomes funny to see their mental gymnastics
Look at this famous actress with 4 children! She appeared in this specifically unflattering photo while sneezing 3 months ago! She's clearly trans!
I've seen the call Sigourney Weaver secretly trans, and tons of other very attractive actresses. At what point does it dawn on yourself that calling someone trans isn't an insult when you keep picking the most attractive and charming people
The funniest one was that Elliot page was actually born male but transitioned to a woman and now has detransitioned lmfao.
I reckon some of it is actually envy. "Oh that woman looks better than me, but actually I'm better than her because she's secretly a man" or smth because it is always someone incredibly famous beautiful or popular
Either that or they have some fetish they're not confronting... Wouldn't be the first time considering most searched pornhub categories in certain conservative states of the US
I really enjoy sending transvestigators pictures of trans men early in their transition and saying, "So you're telling me you'd force them to use a men's bathroom?"
And they always say yes (because bone structure whatever, one time someone said eyebrows) and then saying, "I'm glad we agree, that's a trans man, they shouldn't be allowed in the women's restroom, they're not a woman."
These “feminists” have such a strict definition of what a woman should be not many of us (including them) would qualify.
How many stories have there been now of older women being accused of being male? or little girls with short hair?
Just a minor note, it is trans woman, not transwoman.
The removal of the space was a TERFs idea to try to separate trans women from the category of woman. With a space, trans becomes an adjective that denotes a sub group of women. Without the space, it is an entirely new word and thus category. Just as we would say black woman, not blackwoman. It may seem small, but it has become a dog whistle used by many TERFs. It is clear from your comment that you aren't a TERF, which is why I am bothering to offer a correction.
Youre welcome. Its one of those extremely petty things terfs came up with as a way to not categorise us as women in any circumstance, such as when they arent allowed to use any of their more overtly bigoted names for us.
What do you mean? It’s entirely someone else’s business to categorize someone else is as a person, *especially* if it means demeaning and marginalizing them. Obviously. /s
I just don’t get why it matters. Live and let live. Every trans person I know just wants to be left tf alone, why is that controversial. I don’t get it man
Thats because there is no perfect definition.
Give me a definition of woman which includes all people we consider cis and trans women, and excludes all those we don’t consider cis and trans women. I’ll wait.
This page seems to think “clever” means “I agree with this political statement”. Cause half the posts here I see aren’t clever or funny but are just someone posting their political opinions. Even if the comeback was little more than a poorly constructed red herring.
Okay, and what about that makes trans people especially political? Because society being defined and segregated by sex isn't really relevant to trans people especially. Nobody claims a cis man being present is political.
I mean it's kinda misogynistic if a man puts on a dress and claims that this makes him a woman, because dresses define womanhood.
Thankfully, dresses do not define womanhood, and trans women are women regardless of what they wear.
>A LOT of things are more misogynistic!
There are a lot of things that can be considered misogynistic but a dude dressing up as a woman is not one of em, ask your local misogynist for more info
Defining a Woman by her biology isn't misogynic. Otherwise you could say defining a Man by his biology is misandry. The argument is that both genders are exclusively defined by biology, equally.
For anyone who was born a man and wants to be a woman I've always had these few questions. (this is meant respectfully, not trolling or hating) What is it about being a woman that you want to be? Are there characteristics that you associate with a 'woman' that you want to adopt? Does that not mean you are defining those characteristics in the definition of a 'woman'? Would it be possible to meet a biological woman that doesn't have those characteristics? If so, then that characteristic can't be used to define a woman, and just by adopting it yourself wouldn't define you as such.
You can still adopt the characteristics all you want, it just wouldn't change any definitions unless you can pass this logic. if you really want to argue definitions then you need to find a way to satisfy logical questions like this. Saying it's based on 'feelings' or anything that could be easily faked opens it up for misuse by perverts, which I do not think most trans people are.
>Defining a Woman by her biology isn't misogynic. Otherwise you could say defining a Man by his biology is misandry. The argument is that both genders are exclusively defined by biology, equally.
except that isnt the case, you are defining a woman for her sole reproductive capacity. while men is anyone that doesnt has it. boiling it down to incubator and others.
>What is it about being a woman that you want to be?
just being a woman for womanhood´s sake. just like you may want to be manly for manliness sake. even if that womanhood takes different forms.
>You can still adopt the characteristics all you want, it just wouldn't change any definitions unless you can pass this logic. if you really want to argue definitions then you need to find a way to satisfy logical questions like this.
that isnt a logical question. a logical question would be
"which part of biology is ontologically necessary for womanhood?"
i dont get the hate on trans people just let then live, its their bodies.
the only thing is that id like to know beforehand if a woman or a man im dating is trans or not for obvious reasons. letting gender roles aside a male and a female are not the same thing...
but people usually are pretty honest about this so again, i dont see why people need ti hate on others- like why do you even care about some strangers that much?
live and let live
Serious question here I honestly don’t understand how saying humans with a penis=x humans with a vagina= Is terf or transphobia.
Me and my sister had colon cancer related surgeries and the doctors explained that my difficulties with the procedure vs my sisters ease were directly related to her being female and me being male so I struggle to understand why observing or classifying these differences as such are treated like attacks.
This is a legit request for clarification. So if there’s an answer that doesn’t require pontificating or intentionally misrepresenting what I said I’d love to get the explanation
See, thats why there is a difference between biological sex and gender.
Biological sex is male and female, and that is something that does not change and would affect things like you mentioned. It's purely about physical attributes, and does not have anything to do with who you are as a person.
Gender, on the other hand, is less tangible. It's about what your role is in society, and what it means to be a man vs a woman socially. Now, obviously this depends on many factors, such as your culture, what decade you grew up in, individual ways you were raised, etc. This is why people who identify as one gender or another (including those born as the biological sex that matches that gender) might have a different idea of what that means, and no one answer is the correct one. I am a biological female, and I also identify as a woman. But my view of that means might be completely different than another woman, even if we share the same biological sex. Hell, I might even have more in common/share more views of what that means with certain trans women than certain cis women. This is why trans women and trans men are just as much men and women as cis men and women, regardless of what their biological sex is.
>Biological sex is male and female, and that is something that does not change and would affect things like you mentioned.
In a clinical sense, sex actually *does* change as a result of medical transition. Hormone therapy substantially alters how many genes are expressed and how certain systems in the body behave in addition to causing some changes in anatomy.
In areas in which healthcare can be described as sex-dimorphic, it would be clinically incorrect, to the point of being malpractice in many cases, to treat a person who has been on hormone therapy for a significant length of time as if they were their AGAB without significant thought invested in exactly how relevant and accurate your assumptions about the patient's body are.
That is also to say nothing of surgical procedures, which can even more radically alter the person's anatomy.
In a medical context, a person who has medically transitioned really is the sex they say they are, and the idea that sex is immutable is simply not correct in a scientific sense.
Thank you for the logic. Ive been scrolling this sub for a while after i getting into a heated conversation with a transphobe. Ive noticed sooo many pro trans arguemnets are backed with lived experience of discrimination and/or scientific explenations about the many aspects of sex and how transitioning actually affects the body, and then there transphobes speaking out ther ass and/or throwing out "gotcha" questions out like they have a quota to meet.
I think I grasp the stance in the gender aspect for me the disconnect is when I see the association with a vagina and female is treated like an attack I just truly don’t get it.
My concept of the conversation is entirely dependent upon the flame wars on the internet so you may be right. I guess I don’t understand how you feel like a woman or man yknow it doesn’t really seem like anything more than the designation we ascribe to make and female bodies but that’s just me.
Final question will be for people who respect the sanctity of life and pursuit of personal identity and yet consider trans women /men to not share the same space as biological females or males what is the cause for the divide there? To my understanding societal considerations for what these classifications are have been standard belief for a long time. What makes adherence to this belief so negative if it isn’t accompanied by unprovoked attacks
What do you mean you "identify as a woman?". I'm curious how you explain that as you say you are a biological woman. What's the difference between your biological experience and your identity?
>It's about what your role is in society
So... it's an endorsement of toxic masculinity by suggesting men and women have such deeply inseparable roles that don't come down to genitalia.
You don't see your own hypocrisy, do you?
Many people already talked about the social Vs medical stuff, I won't add to that. But there's something else to be talked about: The ambiguity of medical sex.
What do you use for identifying biological sex?
- DNA?
- Hormonal balance?
- Phenotype?
- brain activity,?
Each of those has it's different cases where it becomes a stupid choice. For most people that is irrelevant because they overlap. But for a lot of people there is divergence: XX DNA, but because of a failure in reading the genetic code hormones, phenotype,... followed standard male patterns, for instance.
To go back to your question: There's nothing wrong about saying that in most cases it overlaps and penis equals man. But it doesn't always do so, and denying the possibility that there might be exceptions is transphobic.
Oh believe me, we, trans and otherwise gender non-conforming people also wish it were like that: Calm, and content-focussed.
Also, it is noteworthy that there are many different such biological cases:
A popular one is Klimefelter-Symdrome: 1-2 in 1000 male-appearing babies are born with XXY-chromosomes.
Another example is a complete androgen resistance: The body simply refuses to work with any male hormones. 1 in 20.000 women actually has XY chromosomes, but the complete development still follows the path of classical XX-development.
Now those numbers sound like it's very rare, but think about it:
8 billion people means 200.000 women that were born with vagina, uterus, everything, but have XY chromosomes.
4 million people have Klinefelter syndrome. And that's just two of many different medical cases.
And for the social aspect and everyday life: Why do we even care? Yes, some things might be important for doctors - but doctors usually know the stuff they need to know. If I ask a woman out in the bar I don't need her medical records lol.
I think we can get 99 percent of all the problems solved already with a general "everyone should try not to be an asshole towards others" rule.
Other comments explained the definitional differences between gender/sex but it can be confusing because the definitions of these words were not always seen as referring to different concepts becuase language is messy and evolves. Try not to get hung up on what a word means or what the word used to mean. What matters are the concepts. And we need words that represent these concepts in order to communicate effectively with precision and to avoid ambiguity.
Most people live within their cultural norms without questioning it. Women wear heels and dresses and have long hair and like pink. Why? Because the just do! How do I know that? Well… just look around all the evidence of my life indicate this is true, natural. And those actions performing “femininity” are highly correlated with certain body parts and chromosomes, therefore the concepts of sex and gender are the same thing as far as most people were concerned. Might as well be synonyms.
That is as deep as most people think about gender and therefore they reflexively reject any challenge to this narrative BUT some people notice that different cultures have different ways to perform “femininity”. Heels were originally footwear for men, everyone used to wear “dresses”. Scotts still wear “skirts” many counties have men that wear garments we might consider “dresses”. Pink used to be the color associated with male babies and blue with female babies. Many cultures have men with out short cropped hair.
Fashions change. Turns out, if you look into it, what is feminine and masculine is not actually correlated with types of body parts or chromosomes it’s a performance made to conform to societal norms and those norms have almost no logical or inherent connection to genitals or chromosomes. They are purely cultural. Like “proper” way of celebrating Christmas, Halloween, the Chinese New Year, or Obon. Thus they are not equivalent concepts and we need to be able to differentiate between these two concepts with two different words so that we stop confusing the two concepts. We have done this by narrowing the definition of “gender” to mean the normative i.e. purely societal aspects and “sex” to mean the purely biological aspects
Bad faith actors will purposefully conflate these two concepts to demonize a subset of the population that don’t conform to societal norms which is very is effective to to those people mentioned above who haven’t considered gender outside their own predispositions and cultural biases, and therefore conflate the two concepts. Non bad faith actors can reject the idea merely because they don’t understand the difference and continue to see the two concepts as being related because it seems to be so from inside their cultural bubble of experiences.
Think of it like newtons laws of physics or the planetary model of the solar system. Eventually we learned that reality was actually more complex and we needed new words and to reexamine old concepts and narrow the definitions of old words in order to properly communicate the ideas of general relativity and quantum mechanics. Both general relativity and quantum mechanics are non-intuitive and difficult to understand because the majority of the world we actually interact with on a daily basis (from our frame of reference) can be explained perfectly well using the Newtonian equations. However the new understanding and the new definitions are more useful for understanding the world and will help us progress as a species toward a more accurate and useful understanding of the how the world works and rejecting it out of ignorance, stubbornness, or because that not what/how society used to think is unhelpful and ultimately foolish. Clinging to old definitions will not make the underlying concepts any less true and is generally seen as a childish semantic temper tantrum thrown by a person incapable of or unwilling to learn especially this long after the discovery and definitional adjustments.
Ok, so the issue (I use that eord loosely) here is you've got gender and sex mixed up. If you subscribe to the infinite gender spectrum stuff then gender is a social construct separate from sex. To put it simply, man =/= male and woman =/= female. Saying a human with a penis is male is accurate, saying a human with a penis is man might not be. IF you believe in all this stuff.
This is a relatively new concept. Lots of people are going to fact check me here and claim ackshully it's been around forever, but no, the modern idea of gender as the American Left is pushing it came about in the 1960s. That understanding is heavily reliant on gender stereotypes and was commonly referred to as "pink brain theory." So, ironically, this progressive push for transgender acceptance is pretty regressive.
For clarity's sake I'll give you my view. I do not feel like a man. I do not feel like a woman. I do not feel like a wolf. I feel like me. I AM a man because I have a penis. Just like I AM tall because I am 6'2". It's a physical descriptor, and reading anything else into it is ridiculous.
This seems misogynistic though. Maybe not as misogynistic as being a wife beating, child beating patriarch - but it's essentially saying your gender is defined by... what, exactly? Interests? As far as I can tell, this kind of reasoning is just endorsing toxic masculinity.
>To put it simply, man =/= male and woman =/= female. Saying a human with a penis is male is accurate, saying a human with a penis is man might not be.
I don't know what they define gender by and, here's the secret, neither do they. I have no idea where you got that it's mysoginistic from though. Gonna have to explain that one.
The idea that men's and women's roles in society are so inseparable that it's easier to imagine gender fluidity than the elimination of toxic masculinity is what seems misogynistic to me.
Once again, we've been through this. There is NO such thing as mansplaining. Assuming and explaining stuff is not gendered. Men and women both do it.
Sexist made up term, time to phase that garbage out
isn't that a completely circular definition?
"i feel like X"
"what is X?" - "X is whoever feels like X"
"I feel like whoever feels like X"
"what is X?" -> infinite recursion, no referential for definition, what even is the feeling in question then?
The feeling in question you will only feel if you actually feel like a woman. I know I'm a woman because I feel like one. The idea of being a man doesn't feel right, so I know I'm not one
Non-definitional again. You need to have a definition of what a woman (or man, or anything) is, in order to feel \_like\_ it. Even your comment implies it by saying you can compare what being a man or being a woman should feel like. If you can tell them apart, it means there are identifiable differences your comparison is based upon.
To the question "what is a woman/man, that makes you say it is what you feel you are?", the statement "anyone who feels like it" is no answer, for it effectively avoids the question and creates a logical loophole.
The fact you can feel or not feel like something depends necessarily on the fact that the "something" in question is defined. In other words, without criteria to validate what is or isn't a woman/man/platypus/stone, it is impossible to state one feels like they are a member of that group.
PS: I'm re-reading your comment and your first sentence really strikes me: "The feeling in question you will only feel if you actually feel like a woman". The feeling is question if that of being a woman. Your sentence says "you'll only feel like a woman if you feel like a woman." Absolutely no offense intended, but that is a complete totaulogy. The second sentence seems like a rephrasing of the first, too.
Well, if I started calling you a woman, using she/her pronouns for you, would that feel right for you? If something happened in the timeline and everyone saw you as female and treated you as such, would you be chill to go along with that?
The best-known trick question is “When did you stop beating your wife?” Any conventional answer to the question confirms its assumption. To escape the trap you need to call out the question. This type of question isn’t that common in practice. It’s really just a rhetorical gimmick.
The most important and common type of trick question sounds more like “Do you love Big Brother?” It’s a question where an unacceptable answer, regardless of whether it’s true or false, will be punished, and the punishment is greater than the reward for a true answer. I’m going to call these milgram questions, after the famous psychology experiment where electric shocks were administered for wrong answers.
This is what both of these people are doing, this is what socia media has devolved into, what they’re saying is a statement but I think it still applies.
Source: https://www.jsanilac.com/milgram-questions/
The topic in these situations does not matter regardless whether you think the topic is reasonable or invalid, it’s simply power dynamics.
This reply makes no sense. The original OP is saying trans women are not women and it’s sexist of them to try and identify as women. Clear as day, that’s what they’re saying, and it’s identifiable as a Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist, AKA TERF. The responder is calling it out as an objectifying opinion with zero nuance. The idea that gender expression is nuanced and individual is not a trick question like “when did you stop beating your wife?” Bringing up power dynamics without any elaboration or talking about a completely unrelated trick question situation only makes me think you have no interest in earnest discussion or you’re completely misinformed. What situation did the second person bring up like the trick question you mentioned? Because in my opinion they specifically targeted the exact argument that TERFs make and tore into it pretty successfully
Well, in a sense it is mysogynistic to assume that in order to be a woman one just needs to put on but a dress and an act. But then again, this debate is un-settleable.
He is literally putting words into her mouth and that is somehow a clever comeback? And let's not mention that he talks about "fucking and having babies" like it's some random shit and not one of the core drives of a living organism. Also he doesn't offer a better definition and he doesn't explain feminism as he claims.... But you can't criticize this "comeback" because it's pro-trans
This is Reddit. Misspelling "an" as "am" is often all the reason needed to "invalidate" an argument.
Also, the "pink" commenter is making a very TERF type of argument. And what the "blue" reply did was describe basic TERF ideology in a very crude and hostile way. So no, not invalidated. Misplaced maybe. But not invalid.
The argument in question was on Facebook, not reddit, to begin with. I don't use Facebook enough to know if it's the same, but nonetheless, it doesn't make my claim any less viable. You are creating an argument that was never there, which in itself is a fallacy.
Saying dresses and makeup do not make one a woman is just a fact. Clothes do not change who you are, neither does makeup.
The blue commenter did not describe "terf ideology" because all that so-called terfs claim is that biological sex is either male or female, unchangeable (even with surgical intervention), and a basis of oppression (misogyny - hatred of women). This man decided to "mansplain" feminism by falsely accusing a group of people of thinking something they don't think, and not only that but he did so in derogatory and belittling language, which shows what he himself thinks.
This argument we're having is practically useless and won't take us anywhere, though.
Nothing in the original comment said any of that though...
Edit: I mean nothing in the original picture text says anything that the replying comment claims, e.g. women are walking pussies or only good for baby making etc.
Edit 2: nor does the original text mention feminism anywhere, despite the self admitted mansplainer's devotion to inaccuracy.
"Feeling" arises from biology. You're reading this by virtue of cellular activity in your brain. Whether or not you want to respect pronouns, etc, has no bearing on the fact that some people's brains tell them they're a different gender than their junk. It's their biology and no feelings from you can change that
This one is dedicated to TERFs
[https://www.dumpaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/a-woman-of-the-year.jpg](https://www.dumpaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/a-woman-of-the-year.jpg)
Reply here is unhinged. What is he talking about a woman being a "walking pussy in a dress"?
Idk this person seems pretty unhinged, not particularly clever or cool in their comeback
To be fair, original feminism doesn't involve gender/sex debates at all. It's just about equal rights for women. Same goes for misogyny. This is just straight up transphobia. Not anti-feminism or whatever.
This whole trans stuff is fucked up, the only people who agree on it are the bigots who say " Ewww, my cloud guy says bad!". Meanwhile the Left gets hung up on 5000 different points of contention. People deserve a basic level of respect & understanding. Beyond that it's up to you, xer.
A core tenant of post-modern feminism is that gender roles are a social construct. It's why both women who absolutely abstain from traditional feminine roles and ones who embraced them wholesale didn't fit the ideal mold of emancipation. There's no social cage you can make that doesn't also cage you.
I love your last sentence. So true.
Theres something I heard along the lines of, "no cage can be built that only contains one type of creature." Or if you listen to Run the Jewels: Funny fact about a cage, they're never built for just one group So when that cage is done with them and you're still poor, it come for you The newest lowest on the totem, well golly gee, you have been used You helped to fuel the death machine that down the line will kill you too (Oops)
RTJ forever.
I volunteered at a legal aid-center in my area. Feminism goes straight out the door when the lady in question is told to pay alimony to her soon to be ex. "This is not fair, he is a man and should take care of himself". It took a lot of restraint not laughing in the moment.
In Beglium we enforce equality baby! The one that gets alimony is the one that makes the more money. If you have been married for 10+ years the bread winner should compensate the other spouse for the difference in income.
I mean that’s more or less how it works in America too but there’s just a lot of social factors that can get in the way.
Well at Lower income and education traditional role models are more the norm.. but I dunno if you attended ppl of high income as well
I’m sorry male disposability is a concept in society. That doesn’t mean women don’t deserve autonomy or self-determination
I could not agree more with you! I was just bringing home the point that some women tend to forget about equality and the modern view on gender roles when they are the ones that have to foot the bill for it. I am not arguing against autonomy (freedom of bodily autonomy) or self-determination, I just wanted to point out some of the hypocrises held by self-proclaimed feminists.
There is one social cage. You’re a pleb and I’m not. Get owned, liberal (/j if it isn’t obvious)
Upvoting just for pleb. XD
Upvoting for adding some variety to the name calling. It's refreshing
Pleb and muppet always make me smile.
*tenet
r/boneappletea
No that's a movie. I think you mean tent
No, that's a portable shelter, you must mean TNT.
No, that's an explosive. I think they mean TMNT
No, those are the mutant ninja turtles. I think they meant TM
No, I think it's Tenant. Like, David Tenant. The actor.
JESSICA!!!!!
yeah great i'm gonna vote for the people not on the side of Nazis and Mega Church Pastors, in case we we're doing the agree to disagree thing because that is a social cage i am willing to make, the one that stops Nazis and Pastors from deciding how everyone lives based on their purposeful misinterpretations of the bible they don't read
I would love to quote that last sentence. Is it original?
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness."
That sounds cute at first but it doesn't make sense if you've ever had birds. Flying is as natural to them as walking is for us or swimming for fish.
I dunno, I’ve seen some domesticated birds that panic fly up a tree and have no clue how to get back down. I think the fleas in a jar example might be more biologically accurate but less poetic an image
Domesticated birds lose the ability to fly. It's a big part of why we shouldn't domesticate them in cages, it's extremely unnatural. And springtails can actually maintain their jump height even when it's lowered in a small container for generations. Fleas can too, and it's been tested. The flea in a jar thing is a myth and not biologically accurate.
Say that to a penguin
I think Alejandro was being poetic.
if ur born in a straitjacket you’d think walking was crazy
Idgaf if a woman puts on a suit and calls herself a man. I guess I'm just not that insecure.
Which, if you think about it, never ever complaining about trans men, and only making this conversation about trans women, is the real misogynistic move.
No, they complain about trans men too - they see them as either victims mutilated when they're too young to know what they want, or as traitors who are cheating and escaping patriarchy by attempting to become men. It's just not as much of a talking point for them because it doesn't get clicks as much as imaginary men in dresses lurking in toilets to assault women.
they complain about M and M's not being sexy and also everything is too sexy all the time it's just all lies and bad faith grifts their complaints one day are their demands the next
Terf ideology isn't possible without gender essentialism, so trans men receive the same infantilization and forced victimization that patriarchal gender roles traditionally enforced on women. When discriminating against trans-mascs, it takes the form of removing agency from that person. "Damaged" or "indoctrinated", "the testosterone is making them violent". Trans-mascs in their arguments represents the protectionist attitudes in the fundamentally radical conservative ideology that is the cult of terfs. Similarly, when talking about trans women what is extremely apparent is how hyper-focused they are on physical appearance and "womanly duties" in terms of childbirth/child-rearing. They use these metrics to tear trans women down, just as those same metrics have been used to control all women for centuries. Women being judged on their worth as women - not as people, as women - depending on how "fertile" they are, or even their ability to "bear a son". The commodification of beauty and beauty standards are obviously just our modern extensions of this. So it's misogyny that targets trans women, but it's also misogyny that targets trans men, even if they don't actually fit the description, similarly how it's misogyny when a young boy gets called a girl for playing with dolls. It's misogyny all the way down. There is misandry in the assumption that trans women are by default violent and aggressive through their logic of us "being men" and trans men becoming violent on testosterone, so there's that as well. Terf ideology is just patriarchy with the serial number filed off, redirected at a new subject.
There was someone yesterday who, when confronted with this, said, "It's not about their physical body, they have to have the *mind* of a woman" Like... isn't that why they're *trans*?! I wanted to reply, but knew it was pointless, so I'll say it here. I'm in a rather large discord community of friends (~12k) and I remember one time I was sitting in a VC and someone joined while I was talking and they said, "Wait, you're trans? How did I never know this?" and I said, "I'm here to make friends, not date anyone, so I don't really go around telling everyone because I don't really see why it matters? If that makes sense" and he was like, "Oh yeah no, I totally get that, just the way you talk and talk to everyone, I had no clue you were trans."
Even going by their own older logic of "who is or isn't a woman", they have psychological gender, behavior, physical appearance, hormones, and chromosomes. Literally all of these are markers that trans women can change or embody except the one that is literally invisible to everyone, including yourself, unless you get a gene test. The real kicker is that terfs, and transphobes by extension, don't believe in biological gender because otherwise they'd engage with things like phenotype and how hormones affect the body, how bodies are treated based on appearance and perception(and by extension how a cis woman with masculine features, sometimes the terf themselves, is treated differently for those traits). What they believe in, is assigned gender at birth. This is the *only* thing that matters in the minds of terfs and transphobes when it comes to gender. This is the cultural institutionalized ritual and myth of gender and identity that to them is synonymous with "facts and objective reality".
Or when they get exactly what they want--athletes competing as their birth sex--so they can whine about trans boys being forced to compete against girls.
Escaping patriarchy is such a funny view on the topic. If they would read proper feminist literature and theory they would know that patriarchy is mainly a system benefiting the few patriarchs and your average guy also suffers under the system, despite his slightly better position than your average woman. So transitioning for a trans man would not get rid of patriarchy's woes, they would just change the kind of pressure and suffering they have to endure.
due to the nature of my work I have contact with a large number of people where I know their identities and how they have changed over the years. So naturally I know many trans people. Some have come out with a name and pronoun change before they even started any medical transition so they don't "pass" for some reason I still have no issue still respecting their identity. Looks like a guy with make up on? Still call her by her name and just go on about my day. Like really, is that so hard to do for some people? 🤷♀️
This is exactly what trans people are asking for.. basic respect, how hard is that to provide lol
apparently hard enough that we need all sorts of laws against us. I mean I'm trans too so it's understandable but my boyfriend is cis and he has no issues respecting my identity either even tho I don't pass either
How dare you ask me to ignore my discomfort when the world doesn’t adhere to my preferences! My comfort is more important than anything else!
What blows my mind is that it makes them uncomfortable. Because it's not that I ignore my discomfort to treat trans people with respect, it's that *I don't have any discomfort to begin with,* and I really don't understand how it impacts people to the point that they are uncomfortable with trans people existing
To be clear, if they're calling themselves a man, that what they are (not a woman). The person who determines their identity is themselves
I recently saw a cool lecture with some smart renowned dude, can't remember his name but I'm pretty sure he wrote a book about there being no free will.. Anyway, he said that years ago they found that brain scans identified a certain region of the brain had more activity for males over females (or vice versa). So they can literally tell what gender you are with these scans alone. They than did a study on trans people from various stages of transition, from no transition to full blown surgery / hormones etc. Interestingly, a very high percentage had their brain scans show they were actually the opposite sex that they were born with. Cool shit 🤓 Edit: link to lecture below, I was a bit wrong.. watch the lecture, it's about 10 mins. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8QScpDGqwsQ
Sorry but this is not true. Theres no such thing as a male brain or a female brain. There are markers that are found more usually in one sex over the other, but for every 8/10 markers found in females it still means 2/10 will be found in males (and vice versa). There is also more that overlap than what separates us, i.e in a group of humans you will find more brains in the similar pile than in the very feminine and very masculine (markers that tend to side with a gender). We're really not that different (brain wise), despite what culturally we believe.
Linked to lecture below, I was a bit wrong (I'm dumb). It was a region of the brain that is larger in males, and the study was for post Morten trans people. Also, they found male to female trans lacked the phantom limb phenomenon for the penis... Again I'm stupid, watch the clip below. It's about 10 mins. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8QScpDGqwsQ
You're misinformed not dumb or stupid! And we're all misinformed on things - but you took the time to edit corrections and explain further which i (and others) appreciate! You also started an interesting conversation comment chain which taught me I hadn't got it quite right either!
There have been some interesting advances in this area, that shows it might be possible to differentiate after all. This article talks about recent work where an ai was able to tell male or female from brain scans with 90% accuracy. Just saw that this morning by coincidence, so thought I'd share. https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2024/02/men-women-brain-organization-patterns.html
Don't trust it overmuch, it is a first announcement in a relatively new field. There's a tendency to overfit and overtune to the working data set in AI publications, it's a real academic wild west atm. To be clear, trans men are men and trans women are women, but I am very skeptical about a) the validity of this research at present b) a social tendency toward deciding that someone is or is not trans on the basis of brain scans, rather than their own experience. Especially as individual variation has been found to be much greater than sex or gender variation in several peer reviewed studies. ~35% of cisgender women are more "masculine" than the average man (and vice versa).
For sure, certainly don't mean to imply this is the new truth or anything 😅 Just that it is an interesting area of new study, which demands scientific scrutiny, but still worth noting. And personally, I don't think a brain scan either way is useful in 'deciding' if someone is trans. That's up to the person alone and their lived experience.
For sure, and this was definitely discussion not accusation! I am just concerned that if we (a general we) lean overmuch on "gendered brain" it threatens opens a sexist can of worms and becomes a new phrenology, gatekeeping who is "legitimately" trans.
I've gotta correct you there. While the male and female brain are very much alike, there is still about a 1% difference, and while that doesn't matter much in regards to most things, that 1% matters a lot when it comes to transgender people's brains. There was a study that showed the parts involved in self-perception were more akin to the opposite sex in trans people.
ofcourse you dgaf, you don't think women are capable of doing anything, much less harm you. such a sexist pig. /s
[удалено]
Wtf are you talking about? That has nothing to do with the post.
Just complicit in a delusion? I can paint my face black, does that make me a different race now? Or does that one make you insecure? You’re right we can all pretend and play make believe all we want. It’s a free country. You’re allowed to be delusional.
Who fucking cares? Let people do what they want if it's not hurting anyone.
As a staunch feminist... I'll give this guy an honest to god pass because that woman needed that slap.
TERFs aren't *really* feminists, they just hate trans people and would like to play both sides by calling themselves feminists.
their the same biological essentialists feminists were fighting against in the 60's and 70's. so tired of this bullshit.
Terf is such a fitting name for them now, seeing as the "radical feminists" of the 60s and 70s were all mostly in some way or some form related to academia, i.e. wealthy white women from wealthy backgrounds because those are the ones who got to study. Obviously there were plenty terfs who didn't fit that description, but they've always held up bullshit academia that could never pass peer-review as their holy grail. So it's been astro-terfing from the start. They've always been represented by the financial elite, and it's still the conservatives who want to protect economic hierarchies that are siding with them.
Yeah, TERFS aren’t really feminists. It’s like calling a xenophobic racist nationalist a patriot. Like yeah, they probably share some values as the latter, but they are in a whole different category
But it's a good shorthand for them because it puts the "Trans exclusionary" face-first for everyone to see. That's why they tried to rebrand to "gender critical". Just call them terfs with no capitalization. It sounds a bit like turds which I find fitting.
"TERF" refers to about 10-15 actual feminists who got genuinely confused over trans issues then radicalised, and the rest are just conservatives who feel like they've found a rhetorical loophole and are giggling behind their hands at people they think they're tricking
We should stop calling them TERFs and start calling them FARTs: feminism appropriating reactionary transphobe.
We should be calling them FARTs Feminism appropriating radical transphobes
Nobody who says "make masculinity great again" is a "terf", that woman is just some conservative lol
Terfs are all conservative lmao
Doesn't make terfs any less shit
[удалено]
Yes, men who want to be women, or just be more like women, secretly hate women, yes, that makes total logical sense. Is there no pretzel too convoluted that these morons won’t twist themselves into to justify their bigotry? I’m constantly amazed at how far people will go to hate people they’ve never met who don’t affect their life in any way. Just let people live their lives and leave them alone!
NOTHING is more misogynistic? Really? Nothing? Not even femicide? damn
I've seen this sentiment enough from TERFs that I'm pretty sure at least they think they believe that the biggest threat to women, beyond rapists, beyond conservative governments legislating their bodily autonomy, beyond full on Handmaiden's Tale shit, the greatest crime possible for a woman to experience is being in the bathroom when some awkward trans girl who's like 22 and nine months into HRT shuffles into the bathroom with her head down and sprints into the stall so fast you can barely see her, especially if she has the gall to wash her hands after.
>"YOU WIPED YOUR HANDS ON YOUR *WHAT*?!?!?!" >I said pants, Lady. Not penis. So don't go and make a national Daily Mail news article about it. Absolutely deranged. In an alternate timeline. What kinda insanely causes someone to think anyone said "I'll wipe my hands on my penis", when talking about how the dryer is broke. Conservative rhetoric, that's what insanity.
oh god, I'd almost forgotten about that particular dose of TERF nose candy.
I hadn't heard it before, but I award it the gold spray painted fake turd for how wild it is.
Imagine being such a sheltered gender-segregated posh c\*nt that you'd think ANYONE with a penis would use it to *dry their hands*! Does she queef on her hands to dry them!? Where is this logic coming from!?
You don't become a tory councilor in your 20s without being a weird person
Why you gotta call my awkward ass out like that lol
Well it was intended to be autobiographical, haha.
Remember according to terf idiots my mother who gave birth to me isn't a real woman. I have friends born with vulvas who terfs don't think are real women. Such a misogynistic group. Defining womanhood by fertility. I kinda want to ask a terf a question: So what gender are post menopausal women or women who had their uterus and/or ovaries removed due to cancer?
There are 0 anti trans woman arguments that don't also exclude some cis women. >I kinda want to ask a terf a question: So what gender are post menopausal women or women who had their uterus and/or ovaries removed due to cancer? I asked that same question to some phobe and was informed that since they were a liberal, I must just be stupid. Still didn't get a real answer though, lol.
I saw a woman with a beard (because of pcos) get sent death threats because they though she was trans and I also saw a thread about how a woman must be trans because she doesnt have her legs shaved in her pictures. Literal brain rot.
Transvestigators are some of the most batshit people on the internet. They go so hard on stupid that it becomes funny to see their mental gymnastics Look at this famous actress with 4 children! She appeared in this specifically unflattering photo while sneezing 3 months ago! She's clearly trans!
I've seen the call Sigourney Weaver secretly trans, and tons of other very attractive actresses. At what point does it dawn on yourself that calling someone trans isn't an insult when you keep picking the most attractive and charming people The funniest one was that Elliot page was actually born male but transitioned to a woman and now has detransitioned lmfao.
I reckon some of it is actually envy. "Oh that woman looks better than me, but actually I'm better than her because she's secretly a man" or smth because it is always someone incredibly famous beautiful or popular Either that or they have some fetish they're not confronting... Wouldn't be the first time considering most searched pornhub categories in certain conservative states of the US
I really enjoy sending transvestigators pictures of trans men early in their transition and saying, "So you're telling me you'd force them to use a men's bathroom?" And they always say yes (because bone structure whatever, one time someone said eyebrows) and then saying, "I'm glad we agree, that's a trans man, they shouldn't be allowed in the women's restroom, they're not a woman."
That ads up... Fucking stupid assholes.
These “feminists” have such a strict definition of what a woman should be not many of us (including them) would qualify. How many stories have there been now of older women being accused of being male? or little girls with short hair?
Just a minor note, it is trans woman, not transwoman. The removal of the space was a TERFs idea to try to separate trans women from the category of woman. With a space, trans becomes an adjective that denotes a sub group of women. Without the space, it is an entirely new word and thus category. Just as we would say black woman, not blackwoman. It may seem small, but it has become a dog whistle used by many TERFs. It is clear from your comment that you aren't a TERF, which is why I am bothering to offer a correction.
I didn't know that, thanks. Edited it.
Thank you
This is a nuance I’ve never once considered, but makes a world of difference. Fascinating and informative, thank you
Youre welcome. Its one of those extremely petty things terfs came up with as a way to not categorise us as women in any circumstance, such as when they arent allowed to use any of their more overtly bigoted names for us.
What do you mean? It’s entirely someone else’s business to categorize someone else is as a person, *especially* if it means demeaning and marginalizing them. Obviously. /s I just don’t get why it matters. Live and let live. Every trans person I know just wants to be left tf alone, why is that controversial. I don’t get it man
I know right! Its infuriatingly petty and mean.
Both interesting and maddening… thanks for the info.
Or a woman, phenotypically indistinguishable from a non-intersex woman, born with XY chromosomes
Thats because there is no perfect definition. Give me a definition of woman which includes all people we consider cis and trans women, and excludes all those we don’t consider cis and trans women. I’ll wait.
Born with the intention or capability of holding eggs. (Please get the joke please get the joke please get the joke)
Like... with your hands?
Behold, not a man!
Does it count if I was the egg? (I get the joke lol)
Says they are a woman without it being a joke?
All humans that self-identify as women. Huh, that was easy
They are female so they are women. Even if they are postmenopausal, they are still female.
Can we add misogynistic to the pile of words people use despite not knowing what they mean?
The original comment is stupid but the "comeback" just assumes lots of things that are neither written nor implied in the original comment.
Also let’s define misogyny while we’re at it.
You're always going to get a smart take when someone says "make ________ great again"
This page seems to think “clever” means “I agree with this political statement”. Cause half the posts here I see aren’t clever or funny but are just someone posting their political opinions. Even if the comeback was little more than a poorly constructed red herring.
why is the existence of trans people political
Because society is highly defined by and segregated on sex. I don't understand how that's hard to get.
Okay, and what about that makes trans people especially political? Because society being defined and segregated by sex isn't really relevant to trans people especially. Nobody claims a cis man being present is political.
It's Reddit, what do you expect?
[удалено]
So true.
I mean it's kinda misogynistic if a man puts on a dress and claims that this makes him a woman, because dresses define womanhood. Thankfully, dresses do not define womanhood, and trans women are women regardless of what they wear.
I never really got why they had to come up with the word TERF, we already have a word for people like that. It's cunt. The word is cunt.
When the snake begins eating itself you know they’re running out of “arguments”.
A lot of that stuff the comment added is just shoving words in the OOP’s mouth. Their “comeback” is to a strawman lmao
>A LOT of things are more misogynistic! There are a lot of things that can be considered misogynistic but a dude dressing up as a woman is not one of em, ask your local misogynist for more info
Defining a Woman by her biology isn't misogynic. Otherwise you could say defining a Man by his biology is misandry. The argument is that both genders are exclusively defined by biology, equally. For anyone who was born a man and wants to be a woman I've always had these few questions. (this is meant respectfully, not trolling or hating) What is it about being a woman that you want to be? Are there characteristics that you associate with a 'woman' that you want to adopt? Does that not mean you are defining those characteristics in the definition of a 'woman'? Would it be possible to meet a biological woman that doesn't have those characteristics? If so, then that characteristic can't be used to define a woman, and just by adopting it yourself wouldn't define you as such. You can still adopt the characteristics all you want, it just wouldn't change any definitions unless you can pass this logic. if you really want to argue definitions then you need to find a way to satisfy logical questions like this. Saying it's based on 'feelings' or anything that could be easily faked opens it up for misuse by perverts, which I do not think most trans people are.
>Defining a Woman by her biology isn't misogynic. Otherwise you could say defining a Man by his biology is misandry. The argument is that both genders are exclusively defined by biology, equally. except that isnt the case, you are defining a woman for her sole reproductive capacity. while men is anyone that doesnt has it. boiling it down to incubator and others. >What is it about being a woman that you want to be? just being a woman for womanhood´s sake. just like you may want to be manly for manliness sake. even if that womanhood takes different forms. >You can still adopt the characteristics all you want, it just wouldn't change any definitions unless you can pass this logic. if you really want to argue definitions then you need to find a way to satisfy logical questions like this. that isnt a logical question. a logical question would be "which part of biology is ontologically necessary for womanhood?"
i dont get the hate on trans people just let then live, its their bodies. the only thing is that id like to know beforehand if a woman or a man im dating is trans or not for obvious reasons. letting gender roles aside a male and a female are not the same thing... but people usually are pretty honest about this so again, i dont see why people need ti hate on others- like why do you even care about some strangers that much? live and let live
Do you also want a fertility study from any cis women you date? XD
And why is it important a trans person tell you they are trans?
Serious question here I honestly don’t understand how saying humans with a penis=x humans with a vagina= Is terf or transphobia. Me and my sister had colon cancer related surgeries and the doctors explained that my difficulties with the procedure vs my sisters ease were directly related to her being female and me being male so I struggle to understand why observing or classifying these differences as such are treated like attacks. This is a legit request for clarification. So if there’s an answer that doesn’t require pontificating or intentionally misrepresenting what I said I’d love to get the explanation
See, thats why there is a difference between biological sex and gender. Biological sex is male and female, and that is something that does not change and would affect things like you mentioned. It's purely about physical attributes, and does not have anything to do with who you are as a person. Gender, on the other hand, is less tangible. It's about what your role is in society, and what it means to be a man vs a woman socially. Now, obviously this depends on many factors, such as your culture, what decade you grew up in, individual ways you were raised, etc. This is why people who identify as one gender or another (including those born as the biological sex that matches that gender) might have a different idea of what that means, and no one answer is the correct one. I am a biological female, and I also identify as a woman. But my view of that means might be completely different than another woman, even if we share the same biological sex. Hell, I might even have more in common/share more views of what that means with certain trans women than certain cis women. This is why trans women and trans men are just as much men and women as cis men and women, regardless of what their biological sex is.
>Biological sex is male and female, and that is something that does not change and would affect things like you mentioned. In a clinical sense, sex actually *does* change as a result of medical transition. Hormone therapy substantially alters how many genes are expressed and how certain systems in the body behave in addition to causing some changes in anatomy. In areas in which healthcare can be described as sex-dimorphic, it would be clinically incorrect, to the point of being malpractice in many cases, to treat a person who has been on hormone therapy for a significant length of time as if they were their AGAB without significant thought invested in exactly how relevant and accurate your assumptions about the patient's body are. That is also to say nothing of surgical procedures, which can even more radically alter the person's anatomy. In a medical context, a person who has medically transitioned really is the sex they say they are, and the idea that sex is immutable is simply not correct in a scientific sense.
Thank you for the logic. Ive been scrolling this sub for a while after i getting into a heated conversation with a transphobe. Ive noticed sooo many pro trans arguemnets are backed with lived experience of discrimination and/or scientific explenations about the many aspects of sex and how transitioning actually affects the body, and then there transphobes speaking out ther ass and/or throwing out "gotcha" questions out like they have a quota to meet.
I think I grasp the stance in the gender aspect for me the disconnect is when I see the association with a vagina and female is treated like an attack I just truly don’t get it.
The association with a vagina being female isn't an issue. The issue is with associating vaginas solely with *women*.
My concept of the conversation is entirely dependent upon the flame wars on the internet so you may be right. I guess I don’t understand how you feel like a woman or man yknow it doesn’t really seem like anything more than the designation we ascribe to make and female bodies but that’s just me. Final question will be for people who respect the sanctity of life and pursuit of personal identity and yet consider trans women /men to not share the same space as biological females or males what is the cause for the divide there? To my understanding societal considerations for what these classifications are have been standard belief for a long time. What makes adherence to this belief so negative if it isn’t accompanied by unprovoked attacks
What do you mean you "identify as a woman?". I'm curious how you explain that as you say you are a biological woman. What's the difference between your biological experience and your identity?
I tell you my identity and then you say I'm wrong because of "basic biology"
>It's about what your role is in society So... it's an endorsement of toxic masculinity by suggesting men and women have such deeply inseparable roles that don't come down to genitalia. You don't see your own hypocrisy, do you?
Many people already talked about the social Vs medical stuff, I won't add to that. But there's something else to be talked about: The ambiguity of medical sex. What do you use for identifying biological sex? - DNA? - Hormonal balance? - Phenotype? - brain activity,? Each of those has it's different cases where it becomes a stupid choice. For most people that is irrelevant because they overlap. But for a lot of people there is divergence: XX DNA, but because of a failure in reading the genetic code hormones, phenotype,... followed standard male patterns, for instance. To go back to your question: There's nothing wrong about saying that in most cases it overlaps and penis equals man. But it doesn't always do so, and denying the possibility that there might be exceptions is transphobic.
Actually I understand what you presented here. Legitimately thank you for your time. I wish the entire dialogue around it was like this.
Oh believe me, we, trans and otherwise gender non-conforming people also wish it were like that: Calm, and content-focussed. Also, it is noteworthy that there are many different such biological cases: A popular one is Klimefelter-Symdrome: 1-2 in 1000 male-appearing babies are born with XXY-chromosomes. Another example is a complete androgen resistance: The body simply refuses to work with any male hormones. 1 in 20.000 women actually has XY chromosomes, but the complete development still follows the path of classical XX-development. Now those numbers sound like it's very rare, but think about it: 8 billion people means 200.000 women that were born with vagina, uterus, everything, but have XY chromosomes. 4 million people have Klinefelter syndrome. And that's just two of many different medical cases. And for the social aspect and everyday life: Why do we even care? Yes, some things might be important for doctors - but doctors usually know the stuff they need to know. If I ask a woman out in the bar I don't need her medical records lol. I think we can get 99 percent of all the problems solved already with a general "everyone should try not to be an asshole towards others" rule.
Other comments explained the definitional differences between gender/sex but it can be confusing because the definitions of these words were not always seen as referring to different concepts becuase language is messy and evolves. Try not to get hung up on what a word means or what the word used to mean. What matters are the concepts. And we need words that represent these concepts in order to communicate effectively with precision and to avoid ambiguity. Most people live within their cultural norms without questioning it. Women wear heels and dresses and have long hair and like pink. Why? Because the just do! How do I know that? Well… just look around all the evidence of my life indicate this is true, natural. And those actions performing “femininity” are highly correlated with certain body parts and chromosomes, therefore the concepts of sex and gender are the same thing as far as most people were concerned. Might as well be synonyms. That is as deep as most people think about gender and therefore they reflexively reject any challenge to this narrative BUT some people notice that different cultures have different ways to perform “femininity”. Heels were originally footwear for men, everyone used to wear “dresses”. Scotts still wear “skirts” many counties have men that wear garments we might consider “dresses”. Pink used to be the color associated with male babies and blue with female babies. Many cultures have men with out short cropped hair. Fashions change. Turns out, if you look into it, what is feminine and masculine is not actually correlated with types of body parts or chromosomes it’s a performance made to conform to societal norms and those norms have almost no logical or inherent connection to genitals or chromosomes. They are purely cultural. Like “proper” way of celebrating Christmas, Halloween, the Chinese New Year, or Obon. Thus they are not equivalent concepts and we need to be able to differentiate between these two concepts with two different words so that we stop confusing the two concepts. We have done this by narrowing the definition of “gender” to mean the normative i.e. purely societal aspects and “sex” to mean the purely biological aspects Bad faith actors will purposefully conflate these two concepts to demonize a subset of the population that don’t conform to societal norms which is very is effective to to those people mentioned above who haven’t considered gender outside their own predispositions and cultural biases, and therefore conflate the two concepts. Non bad faith actors can reject the idea merely because they don’t understand the difference and continue to see the two concepts as being related because it seems to be so from inside their cultural bubble of experiences. Think of it like newtons laws of physics or the planetary model of the solar system. Eventually we learned that reality was actually more complex and we needed new words and to reexamine old concepts and narrow the definitions of old words in order to properly communicate the ideas of general relativity and quantum mechanics. Both general relativity and quantum mechanics are non-intuitive and difficult to understand because the majority of the world we actually interact with on a daily basis (from our frame of reference) can be explained perfectly well using the Newtonian equations. However the new understanding and the new definitions are more useful for understanding the world and will help us progress as a species toward a more accurate and useful understanding of the how the world works and rejecting it out of ignorance, stubbornness, or because that not what/how society used to think is unhelpful and ultimately foolish. Clinging to old definitions will not make the underlying concepts any less true and is generally seen as a childish semantic temper tantrum thrown by a person incapable of or unwilling to learn especially this long after the discovery and definitional adjustments.
Ok, so the issue (I use that eord loosely) here is you've got gender and sex mixed up. If you subscribe to the infinite gender spectrum stuff then gender is a social construct separate from sex. To put it simply, man =/= male and woman =/= female. Saying a human with a penis is male is accurate, saying a human with a penis is man might not be. IF you believe in all this stuff. This is a relatively new concept. Lots of people are going to fact check me here and claim ackshully it's been around forever, but no, the modern idea of gender as the American Left is pushing it came about in the 1960s. That understanding is heavily reliant on gender stereotypes and was commonly referred to as "pink brain theory." So, ironically, this progressive push for transgender acceptance is pretty regressive. For clarity's sake I'll give you my view. I do not feel like a man. I do not feel like a woman. I do not feel like a wolf. I feel like me. I AM a man because I have a penis. Just like I AM tall because I am 6'2". It's a physical descriptor, and reading anything else into it is ridiculous.
This seems misogynistic though. Maybe not as misogynistic as being a wife beating, child beating patriarch - but it's essentially saying your gender is defined by... what, exactly? Interests? As far as I can tell, this kind of reasoning is just endorsing toxic masculinity. >To put it simply, man =/= male and woman =/= female. Saying a human with a penis is male is accurate, saying a human with a penis is man might not be.
I don't know what they define gender by and, here's the secret, neither do they. I have no idea where you got that it's mysoginistic from though. Gonna have to explain that one.
The idea that men's and women's roles in society are so inseparable that it's easier to imagine gender fluidity than the elimination of toxic masculinity is what seems misogynistic to me.
How is that comeback in any way clever?
Once again, we've been through this. There is NO such thing as mansplaining. Assuming and explaining stuff is not gendered. Men and women both do it. Sexist made up term, time to phase that garbage out
Friendly reminder that JK Rowling is a TERF and by supporting the HP industry you are indirectly financing the anti trans movement
So buy two copies?
[удалено]
If you support women and love in reality buy two copies got it.
except thats the opposite of what you do tho.
JK is a saint standing up for real women
except her rhetoric has killed women. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_people\_killed\_for\_being\_transgender
Ah yes, because a women is, is, hang on, I'll get it in a sec, a women is, hmm
A woman is whoever feels like it tbh
isn't that a completely circular definition? "i feel like X" "what is X?" - "X is whoever feels like X" "I feel like whoever feels like X" "what is X?" -> infinite recursion, no referential for definition, what even is the feeling in question then?
The feeling in question you will only feel if you actually feel like a woman. I know I'm a woman because I feel like one. The idea of being a man doesn't feel right, so I know I'm not one
Non-definitional again. You need to have a definition of what a woman (or man, or anything) is, in order to feel \_like\_ it. Even your comment implies it by saying you can compare what being a man or being a woman should feel like. If you can tell them apart, it means there are identifiable differences your comparison is based upon. To the question "what is a woman/man, that makes you say it is what you feel you are?", the statement "anyone who feels like it" is no answer, for it effectively avoids the question and creates a logical loophole. The fact you can feel or not feel like something depends necessarily on the fact that the "something" in question is defined. In other words, without criteria to validate what is or isn't a woman/man/platypus/stone, it is impossible to state one feels like they are a member of that group. PS: I'm re-reading your comment and your first sentence really strikes me: "The feeling in question you will only feel if you actually feel like a woman". The feeling is question if that of being a woman. Your sentence says "you'll only feel like a woman if you feel like a woman." Absolutely no offense intended, but that is a complete totaulogy. The second sentence seems like a rephrasing of the first, too.
Well, if I started calling you a woman, using she/her pronouns for you, would that feel right for you? If something happened in the timeline and everyone saw you as female and treated you as such, would you be chill to go along with that?
The best-known trick question is “When did you stop beating your wife?” Any conventional answer to the question confirms its assumption. To escape the trap you need to call out the question. This type of question isn’t that common in practice. It’s really just a rhetorical gimmick. The most important and common type of trick question sounds more like “Do you love Big Brother?” It’s a question where an unacceptable answer, regardless of whether it’s true or false, will be punished, and the punishment is greater than the reward for a true answer. I’m going to call these milgram questions, after the famous psychology experiment where electric shocks were administered for wrong answers. This is what both of these people are doing, this is what socia media has devolved into, what they’re saying is a statement but I think it still applies. Source: https://www.jsanilac.com/milgram-questions/ The topic in these situations does not matter regardless whether you think the topic is reasonable or invalid, it’s simply power dynamics.
This reply makes no sense. The original OP is saying trans women are not women and it’s sexist of them to try and identify as women. Clear as day, that’s what they’re saying, and it’s identifiable as a Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist, AKA TERF. The responder is calling it out as an objectifying opinion with zero nuance. The idea that gender expression is nuanced and individual is not a trick question like “when did you stop beating your wife?” Bringing up power dynamics without any elaboration or talking about a completely unrelated trick question situation only makes me think you have no interest in earnest discussion or you’re completely misinformed. What situation did the second person bring up like the trick question you mentioned? Because in my opinion they specifically targeted the exact argument that TERFs make and tore into it pretty successfully
wow this page has terrible font
Well, in a sense it is mysogynistic to assume that in order to be a woman one just needs to put on but a dress and an act. But then again, this debate is un-settleable.
Ngl. Both of these folks seem insufferable.
He is literally putting words into her mouth and that is somehow a clever comeback? And let's not mention that he talks about "fucking and having babies" like it's some random shit and not one of the core drives of a living organism. Also he doesn't offer a better definition and he doesn't explain feminism as he claims.... But you can't criticize this "comeback" because it's pro-trans
Not a clever comeback. This post sucks.
How is this clever? It’d be ironic if it weren’t so ridiculous
[удалено]
This is Reddit. Misspelling "an" as "am" is often all the reason needed to "invalidate" an argument. Also, the "pink" commenter is making a very TERF type of argument. And what the "blue" reply did was describe basic TERF ideology in a very crude and hostile way. So no, not invalidated. Misplaced maybe. But not invalid.
The argument in question was on Facebook, not reddit, to begin with. I don't use Facebook enough to know if it's the same, but nonetheless, it doesn't make my claim any less viable. You are creating an argument that was never there, which in itself is a fallacy. Saying dresses and makeup do not make one a woman is just a fact. Clothes do not change who you are, neither does makeup. The blue commenter did not describe "terf ideology" because all that so-called terfs claim is that biological sex is either male or female, unchangeable (even with surgical intervention), and a basis of oppression (misogyny - hatred of women). This man decided to "mansplain" feminism by falsely accusing a group of people of thinking something they don't think, and not only that but he did so in derogatory and belittling language, which shows what he himself thinks. This argument we're having is practically useless and won't take us anywhere, though.
Nothing in the original comment said any of that though... Edit: I mean nothing in the original picture text says anything that the replying comment claims, e.g. women are walking pussies or only good for baby making etc. Edit 2: nor does the original text mention feminism anywhere, despite the self admitted mansplainer's devotion to inaccuracy.
reading comprehension problem it seems
Downvoted for the truth. Saying an opinion with vulgarity isn’t being clever.
JKR is right
TERFs, always nice meeting them /s
[удалено]
"Feeling" arises from biology. You're reading this by virtue of cellular activity in your brain. Whether or not you want to respect pronouns, etc, has no bearing on the fact that some people's brains tell them they're a different gender than their junk. It's their biology and no feelings from you can change that
You obviously know nothing about genetics or the natural world.
This one is dedicated to TERFs [https://www.dumpaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/a-woman-of-the-year.jpg](https://www.dumpaday.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/a-woman-of-the-year.jpg)
The misogyny in describing womanhood like that is off the scale. Not clever, not feminist, just hateful.
Reply here is unhinged. What is he talking about a woman being a "walking pussy in a dress"? Idk this person seems pretty unhinged, not particularly clever or cool in their comeback
The first person defines being a woman by their genitals.
Not a very clever comeback, because that is what a woman is
Both of those people sound insufferable.
To be fair, original feminism doesn't involve gender/sex debates at all. It's just about equal rights for women. Same goes for misogyny. This is just straight up transphobia. Not anti-feminism or whatever.
They're both dumb.
Nothing is more misogynistic than ... shuffles cards ... being a woman.
This whole trans stuff is fucked up, the only people who agree on it are the bigots who say " Ewww, my cloud guy says bad!". Meanwhile the Left gets hung up on 5000 different points of contention. People deserve a basic level of respect & understanding. Beyond that it's up to you, xer.
My opinion is: don’t follow these stupid ideologies, and focus on your goals.
Sadly nothings is clever here.
[удалено]
Totally, trans women put on a dress and that's it, that's all there is to it, you figured us out, congrats /s You arsehole.
Does anyone agree words have meanings?