So “concerned”! |
|
I read this thread and I see confusion between PPs, all of good intent, because of what looks like semantics to me. When you use the word “woman”, how do you mean it? How do you define it? If you are talking about biological sex, the definition is based on chromosomes. XX is female. XY is male. We must acknowledge that there are a small group of people who do not fit into either of these boxes due to chromosomal abnormalities, but I don’t see that this third group is what we are talking about here. Another discussion perhaps.
Then there is the use of “woman” to denote a gender. Here things get more slippery for me. What does this mean? If you separate this from biological sex, then you are talking purely about things that result from socialization. I submit that when it comes to the idea of gender separate from biological sex, that the definition of what is “woman” would be unique to each individual depending on the place/time/culture in which they were raised and their own unique life experiences. The same for “man.” The more I think about it, the more the idea that some people would refuse to pick one of the other with all the baggage that can come with these terms makes perfect sense to me. It feels like some of the PPs who would call themselves trans advocates and call the rest of us anti-trans are making some broad and unfair assumptions about what is required to be a trans supporter. What you are really concerned about, what we are all concerned about, is the safety and well-being of trans people. BUT you are getting hung up on convincing people to believe something that is simply, factually untrue as a litmus test for our support. The supporters of JKR seem to be trying to say to you that, based on biological sex, you cannot say that a trans woman is the same as a biologically-born woman. There are consequences of this that are important to acknowledge and navigate, as many posters on this thread have discussed more eloquently than I could. The problem is not to acknowledge the differences. What we should all be worried about for trans people, or any group of people, really, is that differences are not used to harm them, bully them, marginalize them. We are looking for everyone to be treated as having the same worth as human beings, to receive the same respect as human beings, to having their emotional and physical needs met. Outside of a few trolls, I would say that those of us arguing on this thread all want those needs met for trans people. Period. But the people who are saying that trans women are women, completely the same, are asking many of us to accept something we see as fundamentally untrue. They are presenting it as an absolute criterion for being pro-trans and the only way we can affirm the things I wrote in the previous paragraph. I would submit that I can disagree, and see trans women as fundamentally different than biologically born women, and still support them and want all those things for them. In some cases, I would say to ignore the differences is to their peril. Take the example of health care. The fact that the Trump administration would roll back anti-discrimination protections for trans people is abhorrent to me. But I would also submit to you that to ignore the original biological sex of a trans person in the course of their health care would be to their detriment. What we need to be advocating for is more attention in research and medical education to produce doctors who are versed in the unique medical needs of this population. |
DP but what?! How is pointing out that power dynamics in a critical theory prism are precarious a religious statement? Oh yeah, I found it here. John 3:57 "And so sayeth the Lord, Marx's philosophy of unconscious social dynamics is satanic." |
|
Here's what I've taken from this thread. In order to be supportive of trans, lesbians must have sex with people with penises because gender is just a social construct and all property, including your own body, is theft.
I used to be liberal. But the left has jumped the shark. |
I’m sorry you have so much trouble reading. |
By attributing that as a mechanism of “the secular left”. PP seems to prefer good ‘ole-fashioned religious oppression of hating and attacking everyone who isn’t like you. |
Lesbian here. It bothers me because my mom also wanted me to “keep an open mind” about dating men. My sexual orientation is not changeable. And I’m not attracted to gender identity, I’m attracted to sex. Same as most people. This quote from the article particularly bothers me: > “ Are you afraid of genitals you’re not familiar with? Some trans women have a penis, some don’t. Some trans men have a penis, some don’t. You can’t assume someone’s genitals based on their identity, and more so, you might be missing out on sex that’s fun and pleasurable just because you’re unable to see a penis as feminine or a vulva as masculine. How is my permanently attached strapon functionally any different than a cis woman’s detachable strapon?” Your PEN*S is not remotely comparable to anyone’s STRAPON. This is exactly what straight men say to try to get lesbians to sleep with them. My dislike of male anatomy isn’t something I need to get over — that is what Christian conversion therapy tries and fails to do. And while a trans woman may or may not have a pn*s, she definitely doesn’t have a vag*na. Even the surgical ones are just not the same. |
Different poster, but as a lesbian I also found this horrible, rapey, and soaked with male privilege: “Are you afraid of genitals you’re not familiar with? Some trans women have a penis, some don’t. Some trans men have a penis, some don’t. You can’t assume someone’s genitals based on their identity, and more so, you might be missing out on sex that’s fun and pleasurable just because you’re unable to see a penis as feminine or a vulva as masculine. How is my permanently attached strapon functionally any different than a cis woman’s detachable strapon?” JFC IT IS NOT THE SAME THING. I might be missing out on pleasurable sex with your magic girldick? Thanks a bunch. This is language of of corrective rape. I’m not “afraid” or “unable to see a penis as feminine”. Tie a pink bow on your penis and I’ll agree it’s totally the girliest penis I’ve ever seen. Still won’t want to f**k it, though. |
Hah! Hi, sister. We posted at exactly the same time about exactly the same quote. |
| Hey girl. Yup, I agree. Y’all are welcome to hang out but don’t make us talk about, look at, or touch your d*ck. It shouldn’t be controversial to say lesbians don’t like d*ck! |
Thank you for explaining. Personally, I still don’t quite see the article as “rape culture”. To me, it didn’t sound like the author was trying to force sex or coerce anyone. But that’s based on my own experiences and perspectives. Maybe the author is drawing only upon her own experiences and knowledge and wasn’t aware of conversion techniques, etc.? Glad you shared so I can understand your perspective better. |
| Yup! I will untangle your spaghetti straps, hold your purse, and vote in your interests. But I won’t sleep with you and I won’t feel guilty about it, either. |
It's definitely a male tendency to try to convince someone who says they're not interested that "oh yes, you actually ARE interested!", and not let up until they get what they want. I think it's happened to most women. There's a reason that the phrase "no means NO!" is drilled into women and "he wouldn't take no for an answer" is something we've grown accustomed to hearing. It's not okay. |
Yup. If you fee the need to write a blog post about why someone should sleep with you, just... don’t. |
I generally agree with JKR and with this. I know 2 children who are transitioning at some level. For both them this consists of affirming their choices in clothing, personal styles, names, and pronouns but perhaps at some point it will include medicine. For children, gender affirmation is life and death, sometimes that includes using medication with tradeoffs. |