Question for those of you that are transgender...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter (19) is trans. She doesn’t care about about any that nonsense. She does appreciate it when people attempt to use her preferred pronouns. The rest is just noise. She considers it virtue signaling.

OP here again, this was one of the first responses to my post. This poster actually understood my question and didn't assume it was asked in bad faith or that I was being insincere. She actually has a transgender daughter and isn't someone just posting on their behalf.

Ok. Did you read any other responses? Or only the one that agreed with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter (19) is trans. She doesn’t care about about any that nonsense. She does appreciate it when people attempt to use her preferred pronouns. The rest is just noise. She considers it virtue signaling.

OP here again, this was one of the first responses to my post. This poster actually understood my question and didn't assume it was asked in bad faith or that I was being insincere. She actually has a transgender daughter and isn't someone just posting on their behalf.

Ok. Did you read any other responses? Or only the one that agreed with you.

OP here, I read all the responses and appreciated the ones that actually answered my question. What I didn't appreciate is some posters assuming I was being insincere, disrespectful and just posting a "concern". I also wanted to hear directly from the transgender community not from people answering on their behalf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter (19) is trans. She doesn’t care about about any that nonsense. She does appreciate it when people attempt to use her preferred pronouns. The rest is just noise. She considers it virtue signaling.

OP here again, this was one of the first responses to my post. This poster actually understood my question and didn't assume it was asked in bad faith or that I was being insincere. She actually has a transgender daughter and isn't someone just posting on their behalf.

See this is why you're getting pushback, because it actually IS bad faith question and your participation in the thread has made that even clearer. Let me explain how I know this:

From the beginning you've got a narrative you're looking to validate, that (for want of a better phrase) "real trans people" don't care about "silly" language issues and that that is driven by "activists." Ostensibly, you're asking for trans perspectives, but you're 1) on a totally anonymous site with very few trans posters and 2) only favorably responding to posts that validate your preexisting narrative no matter how well that person even claims to know trans people. Someone reporting what they heard a non-trans poster say they believed about medical language is enough for you, if it goes along with what you believe. You didn't go ask an actual trans person in real life, which is what I do when I have questions about this kind of thing. Actual trans people I know in life actually do care about these issues, but that doesn't validate your narrative so you ignore it (I posted above and you just told me you don't want to "appease a minority.'). It's only the trans people who agree with you who "count."

The other part is that your narrative is so typical of the privileged classes response to the uncomfortable demands of the less privileged that anyone with any experience in these kinds of conversations is going to see what you're doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

Exactly. Thank you. I was wondering what I’m missing here. As I said, I think this language issue is being created just so activists have something to champion.

That’s rich coming from someone championing “concern”.

I think some people saw the term “people with a cervix” somewhere and then started a hyperbolic tirade against “SJWs”. Disregarding reason, context, and scale.

My first post in this thread is above saying everyone who needs these services is a bio woman. I’m not who you are assuming I am.

That said, I think a lot of you activists like starting fires just so you can put them out. You revel in the controversy and anger. It’s really unfortunate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, a few people have sincerely tried to explain how to be respectful. Did you read them? Have questions about that?

If you were actually sincere…

Message received.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

Exactly. Thank you. I was wondering what I’m missing here. As I said, I think this language issue is being created just so activists have something to champion.

That’s rich coming from someone championing “concern”.

I think some people saw the term “people with a cervix” somewhere and then started a hyperbolic tirade against “SJWs”. Disregarding reason, context, and scale.

My first post in this thread is above saying everyone who needs these services is a bio woman. I’m not who you are assuming I am.

That said, I think a lot of you activists like starting fires just so you can put them out. You revel in the controversy and anger. It’s really unfortunate.

Lol. Who started this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter (19) is trans. She doesn’t care about about any that nonsense. She does appreciate it when people attempt to use her preferred pronouns. The rest is just noise. She considers it virtue signaling.

OP here again, this was one of the first responses to my post. This poster actually understood my question and didn't assume it was asked in bad faith or that I was being insincere. She actually has a transgender daughter and isn't someone just posting on their behalf.

See this is why you're getting pushback, because it actually IS bad faith question and your participation in the thread has made that even clearer. Let me explain how I know this:

From the beginning you've got a narrative you're looking to validate, that (for want of a better phrase) "real trans people" don't care about "silly" language issues and that that is driven by "activists." Ostensibly, you're asking for trans perspectives, but you're 1) on a totally anonymous site with very few trans posters and 2) only favorably responding to posts that validate your preexisting narrative no matter how well that person even claims to know trans people. Someone reporting what they heard a non-trans poster say they believed about medical language is enough for you, if it goes along with what you believe. You didn't go ask an actual trans person in real life, which is what I do when I have questions about this kind of thing. Actual trans people I know in life actually do care about these issues, but that doesn't validate your narrative so you ignore it (I posted above and you just told me you don't want to "appease a minority.'). It's only the trans people who agree with you who "count."

The other part is that your narrative is so typical of the privileged classes response to the uncomfortable demands of the less privileged that anyone with any experience in these kinds of conversations is going to see what you're doing.

Well said.

Not that OP will even read it…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

Exactly. Thank you. I was wondering what I’m missing here. As I said, I think this language issue is being created just so activists have something to champion.

That’s rich coming from someone championing “concern”.

I think some people saw the term “people with a cervix” somewhere and then started a hyperbolic tirade against “SJWs”. Disregarding reason, context, and scale.

My first post in this thread is above saying everyone who needs these services is a bio woman. I’m not who you are assuming I am.

That said, I think a lot of you activists like starting fires just so you can put them out. You revel in the controversy and anger. It’s really unfortunate.

Lol. Who started this thread?

What’s your point? I don’t see anything angry or controversial in the OP. That came later…with you.

[Anonymous]

NP

The short answer to your question, OP, is that the trans community (just like the black community, the lesbian community, the “Asian” community or any other community with a common identifier) is not a monolithic community of people who all think the same. Some trans people may very much care about language, some may not care at all, and most will be somewhere in between.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

Exactly. Thank you. I was wondering what I’m missing here. As I said, I think this language issue is being created just so activists have something to champion.

That’s rich coming from someone championing “concern”.

I think some people saw the term “people with a cervix” somewhere and then started a hyperbolic tirade against “SJWs”. Disregarding reason, context, and scale.

My first post in this thread is above saying everyone who needs these services is a bio woman. I’m not who you are assuming I am.

That said, I think a lot of you activists like starting fires just so you can put them out. You revel in the controversy and anger. It’s really unfortunate.

Lol. Who started this thread?

What’s your point? I don’t see anything angry or controversial in the OP. That came later…with you.

GMAFB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

Exactly. Thank you. I was wondering what I’m missing here. As I said, I think this language issue is being created just so activists have something to champion.

That’s rich coming from someone championing “concern”.

I think some people saw the term “people with a cervix” somewhere and then started a hyperbolic tirade against “SJWs”. Disregarding reason, context, and scale.

My first post in this thread is above saying everyone who needs these services is a bio woman. I’m not who you are assuming I am.

That said, I think a lot of you activists like starting fires just so you can put them out. You revel in the controversy and anger. It’s really unfortunate.

Lol. Who started this thread?

What’s your point? I don’t see anything angry or controversial in the OP. That came later…with you.

OP here, thank you. I'm so tired of trying to explain and defend myself and convince that poster that I was sincere with my question. I have even apologized if my wording was somehow offensive and they still think I'm some privileged disrespectful jerk just posting a "concern". And to answer their question again, I have read every comment and have appreciated the ones that answered my question even the ones that disagreed. There was a spouse whose husband is transgender and they posted their opinion regarding language and I was glad for their input. And I wasn't just looking for certain answers but I had my personal opinion on the matter and that's ok. We are allowed to disagree and the whole point of discussions is to hear different perspectives. That sanctimonious attitude is very off putting and is why discussions on these topics are so challenging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

Exactly. Thank you. I was wondering what I’m missing here. As I said, I think this language issue is being created just so activists have something to champion.

That’s rich coming from someone championing “concern”.

I think some people saw the term “people with a cervix” somewhere and then started a hyperbolic tirade against “SJWs”. Disregarding reason, context, and scale.

My first post in this thread is above saying everyone who needs these services is a bio woman. I’m not who you are assuming I am.

That said, I think a lot of you activists like starting fires just so you can put them out. You revel in the controversy and anger. It’s really unfortunate.

Lol. Who started this thread?

What’s your point? I don’t see anything angry or controversial in the OP. That came later…with you.

OP here, thank you. I'm so tired of trying to explain and defend myself and convince that poster that I was sincere with my question. I have even apologized if my wording was somehow offensive and they still think I'm some privileged disrespectful jerk just posting a "concern". And to answer their question again, I have read every comment and have appreciated the ones that answered my question even the ones that disagreed. There was a spouse whose husband is transgender and they posted their opinion regarding language and I was glad for their input. And I wasn't just looking for certain answers but I had my personal opinion on the matter and that's ok. We are allowed to disagree and the whole point of discussions is to hear different perspectives. That sanctimonious attitude is very off putting and is why discussions on these topics are so challenging.

Discussions are also challenging for the reasons outlined by 09:12. Did you even read that post?

Take some responsibility for your actions. You are not a victim here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

It’s possible. This is what I have heard from trans people. I do not know of anybody in this situation but if somebody wants to say “people who mensturate” instead of “woman” I am not going to have a problem with it.

Some of this language like "people with cervixes" is becoming sufficiently esoteric that I wonder about recent immigrants with low English proficiency actually understanding that this applies to them (versus just understanding the word woman). So from an inclusivity and SJW and health care outreach perspective, there are others to think of as well.

Also, none of this is in a vacuum. Menstruation is not a random thing that happens to random people. It's part of the history of women being treated differently (red tent, etc) and girls dropping out of school where they don't have supplies and bathroom privacy (like rural India), it's all part of the patriarchy and where that comes from. So yes language matters, in terms of who is really affected by all these issues (pregnancy, birth control, abortion, etc.)

It’s as esoteric as a red herring.

You’re not posting in good faith…

It's not a red herring. Check out the first sentence of this article.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/30/health/new-cervical-cancer-screening-recommendations-wellness/index.html?utm_term=link&utm_medium=social&utm_content=2020-07-30T21%3A25%3A58&utm_source=twCNN

Omg. A CNN article. That clearly demonstrates that the language is forever changed and no medical provider in any circumstance will ever use any other language ever again.

We see you and your “concern” for recent immigrants.

What are you talking about? Why do you keep labeling everything a "concern"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

Exactly. Thank you. I was wondering what I’m missing here. As I said, I think this language issue is being created just so activists have something to champion.

That’s rich coming from someone championing “concern”.

I think some people saw the term “people with a cervix” somewhere and then started a hyperbolic tirade against “SJWs”. Disregarding reason, context, and scale.

My first post in this thread is above saying everyone who needs these services is a bio woman. I’m not who you are assuming I am.

That said, I think a lot of you activists like starting fires just so you can put them out. You revel in the controversy and anger. It’s really unfortunate.

Lol. Who started this thread?

What’s your point? I don’t see anything angry or controversial in the OP. That came later…with you.

OP here, thank you. I'm so tired of trying to explain and defend myself and convince that poster that I was sincere with my question. I have even apologized if my wording was somehow offensive and they still think I'm some privileged disrespectful jerk just posting a "concern". And to answer their question again, I have read every comment and have appreciated the ones that answered my question even the ones that disagreed. There was a spouse whose husband is transgender and they posted their opinion regarding language and I was glad for their input. And I wasn't just looking for certain answers but I had my personal opinion on the matter and that's ok. We are allowed to disagree and the whole point of discussions is to hear different perspectives. That sanctimonious attitude is very off putting and is why discussions on these topics are so challenging.

Discussions are also challenging for the reasons outlined by 09:12. Did you even read that post?

Take some responsibility for your actions. You are not a victim here.

You people are crazy and overreacting. Seriously just move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cis person here

First of all, OP, lots of trans people have written and spoken up about this. Opinions vary. Just do a bit of research on it. This might be part of why PP who isn’t white got tired of answering the AA v Black question. People had already written and spoke in depth on the topic but then white came up to them and asked for an explanation from the top, perhaps in bad faith. It’s not easy and it’s time consuming to hash out things like this and it’s more respectful just to look at what has already been said.

Second, it is actually important to remember that not everybody who menstruates is a woman because there are people across the gender spectrum who need access to what we call “women’s healthcare.” We need to make sure everybody who needs it has access to birth control, Pap smears, tampons, etc., and when we say those things are foe women it is actually a barrier for men and non-binary people to have access as well.

Everyone who needs these services is a biological woman. That’s what “women” refers to. Trans men and non-binary people are aware they were born as biological women, right? I’m not sure what the issue is with using “women” for what we all know means “biological women.”

…con’t…

I guess it seems that activists are creating a problem just so they can solve it. Are there trans men or non-binary who don’t realize “women’s medical services” are for them?

Yes exactly this, PP. They are very aware of biology and gender and everything else. Do they really not know they need pap smears just because of "exclusionary" language?

Exactly. Thank you. I was wondering what I’m missing here. As I said, I think this language issue is being created just so activists have something to champion.

That’s rich coming from someone championing “concern”.

I think some people saw the term “people with a cervix” somewhere and then started a hyperbolic tirade against “SJWs”. Disregarding reason, context, and scale.

My first post in this thread is above saying everyone who needs these services is a bio woman. I’m not who you are assuming I am.

That said, I think a lot of you activists like starting fires just so you can put them out. You revel in the controversy and anger. It’s really unfortunate.

Lol. Who started this thread?

What’s your point? I don’t see anything angry or controversial in the OP. That came later…with you.

OP here, thank you. I'm so tired of trying to explain and defend myself and convince that poster that I was sincere with my question. I have even apologized if my wording was somehow offensive and they still think I'm some privileged disrespectful jerk just posting a "concern". And to answer their question again, I have read every comment and have appreciated the ones that answered my question even the ones that disagreed. There was a spouse whose husband is transgender and they posted their opinion regarding language and I was glad for their input. And I wasn't just looking for certain answers but I had my personal opinion on the matter and that's ok. We are allowed to disagree and the whole point of discussions is to hear different perspectives. That sanctimonious attitude is very off putting and is why discussions on these topics are so challenging.

Discussions are also challenging for the reasons outlined by 09:12. Did you even read that post?

Take some responsibility for your actions. You are not a victim here.

You people are crazy and overreacting. Seriously just move on.

There was a poster here that was wishing death upon another poster at one point but Jeff deleted the posts. So yes there is a lot of crazy and overreacting on here.