Ellen Page announced new identity as Elliott Page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ellen/Elliott is the actress who starred in Juno, The Umbrella Academy and Inception.

He looked so sad in this picture. Uncomfortable with sad eyes. Obviously in retrospect we can see what was going on. Hopefully there is joy and happiness in his current and future life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the wide-eyed responses here are just wild. If you can read at an 8th grade level or name all the Kardashians, you sure as hell have the mental capacity to comprehend gender identity.

To pretend otherwise is just willful ignorance.

How much do you expect people to know about an unrelated to them topic?

Ellen is now Elliot and wants to referred as he/them. That's all I need to know.

I'd appreciate all the education and awareness campaign, but there is only so much time for me to be deeply engrossed into all the topics/minority issues. My kid has some special needs, and I don't expect people to learn about those issues on their volition or to know much about the condition. I talk, and explain, and try to educate. Thus, I appreciate the PPs and their labor.

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the wide-eyed responses here are just wild. If you can read at an 8th grade level or name all the Kardashians, you sure as hell have the mental capacity to comprehend gender identity.

To pretend otherwise is just willful ignorance.

How much do you expect people to know about an unrelated to them topic?

Ellen is now Elliot and wants to referred as he/them. That's all I need to know.

I'd appreciate all the education and awareness campaign, but there is only so much time for me to be deeply engrossed into all the topics/minority issues. My kid has some special needs, and I don't expect people to learn about those issues on their volition or to know much about the condition. I talk, and explain, and try to educate. Thus, I appreciate the PPs and their labor.

Same. I have my hands full, and the last thing on my mind are LGBQT topics. While I’m vaguely supportive, I don’t follow any of it in detail. I don’t even know what binary is. I feel comfortable asking questions, though, and people should feel comfortable answering them. And if they don’t, oh well. I’ll go on with my day!

DP. I agree. I’m somewhat interested in this topic, but sadly, I feel like a lot of LGBTQ people feel this topic defines them - they have to make a big announcement about their sexuality and/or gender. Ok? You were Ellen and now you’re Elliot. Got it. Moving on to more pressing issues...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have many waves ions about the broader issue of what it means when people born and assigned the female gender at birth this I they can no longer identify as a woman because they don’t present as femme. Or vice versa. A dude can’t wear a dress. I thought the whole point of gender as a social construct was that we could be free to be you and me as we see fit. For example, where are all the butch lesbians? In my youth I hung with many. Now it seems the young ones who would’ve been “butch” in the 90s are just claiming FTM.
I guess overall to me it seems that frequently it actually pigeonholes gender stereotypes more when people feel that because they don’t represent a mainstream expression of gender they must somehow be transgender. I’m not trying to be trans exclusionary. I don’t actually GAF what anyone wants to identify as, I’ll call you what you want, but I just can’t get past the irony of how much of this actually perpetuates harmful gender stereotypes while trying to be free of them.

Exactly.

Remember when Jenner shared at some awards show (Espys, maybe) about how she got all glammed up, and now she knows how it feel to be a woman?

I mean... no. No, you do not know what it’s like to be a woman.

Totally agree. I definitely support people being who they want to be using, whatever pronouns (although you're going to have to be patient with me getting "he/they" correct if you are expecting me to use an object pronoun that does not agree with the subject pronoun, that just doesn't work grammatically!)

BUT, it does seem like around all this there is this, to me, unacceptable tightening of gender stereotyping. Like if a woman doesn't like getting all dressed up or a girl doesn't like princess and sparkly things, she can't be a women/girl but must be something else. Or a boy who wants to play with girls and likes baby dolls can't be a boy. Maybe not a "girl" but certainly he has to be something else than just a boy who likes different things. Didn't we go through all this back in the 70s-80s! All "Free to Be You and Me." Is there still room for a girl/boy to present themselves outside of the stereotype and still fully embrace the "girl"/"boy" label without some asterixis next to it? This is why the "gender non-conforming" label in particular rubs me the wrong way. Why should anyone have to conform to the stereotype in the first place, to the degree that you have to tell someone that's your label.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's denial of basic biology to pretend gender is a social construct or that it exists on a spectrum. Gender reflects the biology. To pretend it was invented is purely rubbish. There are attributes given to the two genders that have been reinforced by culture over human history and one can consider that constructs, but gender itself is not distinguishable from biology.

Oh it isn’t?
Female and male sexual characteristics generally do not vary across cultures, across human history, across almost all mammalian species.
But a lot of what makes up the idea of “gender” and what social constructs we associate with each sex, that DOES vary and a lot of it is completely arbitrary.
Did you know that pink used to be a “boy” color?
And that it wasn’t socially acceptable in many cultures for women to wear pants?
In some cultures it is the males who preen and wear makeup?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread made me go to Amazon to buy Robert Galbraith's "Troubled Blood".

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the wide-eyed responses here are just wild. If you can read at an 8th grade level or name all the Kardashians, you sure as hell have the mental capacity to comprehend gender identity.

To pretend otherwise is just willful ignorance.

The people on this thread asking questions are not people who give a fig about the Kardashians.

The truth is most of this gender stuff makes little sense. You are born with a biological sex. It is based on your chromosomes. What does it mean to be a man or a woman beyond that? What does it mean to say you know you are a different gender than what your chromosomes indicate? Separate from biological sex most ways we define gender are a bunch of made up bullshit that varies from culture to culture. People who pretend this is cut and dried are full of it.

The way I see it is that everything else in nature is a spectrum and we are now realizing that gender and sexuality are also on a spectrum.

Gender expression is on a spectrum. Sex is binary in human beings.

That's generally true, but not always. There are many variations. There are people born with three chromosomes -XXY. There was a TED Talk by a woman who presents as a woman and was born with a vagina, but she has XY chromosomes. If people exist outside of the binary, then by definition, there is not a binary.

Those are disorders of sexual development - genetic mutations. Some people are born missing limbs. That doesn’t change the fact that human beings have two arms and two legs. That is not a spectrum.

Exactly. As for “assigned at birth,” this makes it sound like doctors arbitrarily pick someone’s gender. No, they don’t assign a “gender” at all. They observe the newborn’s biological sex and record it. The push for this new language denies science & facts. We can be respectful of all types of people without doing that.

Regarding the “deadname” article— that stance is ridiculous. Continuing to call someone by a name they don’t prefer is rude. But mentioning what someone used to be called for informational purposes should be a non-issue. People change their names for all sorts of reasons— marriage, divorce, adoption, Prince, etc. I’ve never heard any of these other groups get upset about the mere mention of their former name.

+100
In addition, are we supposed to simply forget all the memories we have of our pre-transition life? Our entire childhood simply doesn’t exist because someone who is now “dead” experienced it? Ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ellen/Elliott is the actress who starred in Juno, The Umbrella Academy and Inception.

He looked so sad in this picture. Uncomfortable with sad eyes. Obviously in retrospect we can see what was going on. Hopefully there is joy and happiness in his current and future life.

I think that person looks a little stoned. Have you seen the publicity photos of Brad and Angie for Mr & Mrs. Smith? Same glassy eyed look. I think actors often get a little buzzed so they can chill out in front of all the paps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, it’s really problematic when anyone who questions or pushes back on these new terms, etc is called a bigot. I am respectful of everyone. I will call people whatever they ask to be called. I don’t hate trans people or wish them ill will at all. That doesn’t mean I can’t have questions or point out things that don’t make sense.

Calling everyone who doesn’t blindly agree with you a bigot is just a way to shut people down and divide people. It’s controlling and counterproductive.

Completely agree. Much like calling everyone a “racist” if they dare to question illegal immigration. It needs to stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, it’s really problematic when anyone who questions or pushes back on these new terms, etc is called a bigot. I am respectful of everyone. I will call people whatever they ask to be called. I don’t hate trans people or wish them ill will at all. That doesn’t mean I can’t have questions or point out things that don’t make sense.

Calling everyone who doesn’t blindly agree with you a bigot is just a way to shut people down and divide people. It’s controlling and counterproductive.

Completely agree. Much like calling everyone a “racist” if they dare to question illegal immigration. It needs to stop.

Agree. Shutting down logical discussion is the wrong thing to do. If you want people to listen to you, you need to start by listening to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread made me go to Amazon to buy Robert Galbraith's "Troubled Blood".

Why?

Because of the stuff J.K Rowling has had to go through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading this thread made me go to Amazon to buy Robert Galbraith's "Troubled Blood".

Why?

Because of the stuff J.K Rowling has had to go through.

?

You mean the hate for promoting someone who once peer reviewed had to change her research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, it’s really problematic when anyone who questions or pushes back on these new terms, etc is called a bigot. I am respectful of everyone. I will call people whatever they ask to be called. I don’t hate trans people or wish them ill will at all. That doesn’t mean I can’t have questions or point out things that don’t make sense.

Calling everyone who doesn’t blindly agree with you a bigot is just a way to shut people down and divide people. It’s controlling and counterproductive.

Completely agree. Much like calling everyone a “racist” if they dare to question illegal immigration. It needs to stop.

Agree. Shutting down logical discussion is the wrong thing to do. If you want people to listen to you, you need to start by listening to them.

+1. It's unfortunate that basic points of view which should not be controversial are immediately labeled as hateful and discriminatory.

On another forum I was nearly banned for questioning why people are advocating for children to be able to make a permanent life changing decisions about their sexual organs and the ability to reproduce.

Serious question: Why is acceptable for people to "not identify with their gender identity at birth" but not their race identity at birth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ellen/Elliott is the actress who starred in Juno, The Umbrella Academy and Inception.

He looked so sad in this picture. Uncomfortable with sad eyes. Obviously in retrospect we can see what was going on. Hopefully there is joy and happiness in his current and future life.

Agree. More recent pictures have been joyful.

[Anonymous]

I truly don’t understand why the leap to changing pronouns is so important. There always used to be women who dressed and presented masculine. In the past it was frowned upon for men to dress in an effeminate way, and I think it’s a good thing that that perception has improved over time. But I don’t see why the big announcement about pronouns.