Reply to J.K. Rowling’s post on trans-identity and modern misogyny

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "J.K. Rowling’s post on trans-identity and modern misogyny"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Ok I want to take a step back from the name calling and point out where we agree and where we disagree, because I think some people are mistaking my stance (which I think is the same as JKR and other posters)

1. Only people with XX chromosomes menstruate

2. There are people with XX chromosomes but who don’t identify as women who menstruate

3. Trans people deserve to live life in peace and dignity, and we should call people by their preferred names and pronouns

4. Transwomen and ciswomen have differences, which include biology and how they were socialized as children

Ok, here’s where I disagree:

1. There are limited situations where it is legitimate to limit a space to only ciswomen. This includes certain battered women’s shelters if there are victims there who would be triggered around people with male characteristics; competitive women’s sports; and I don’t believe service providers like bikini waxers should be forced to service people with male genitalia (in Canada, many female aestheticians were actually sued for refusing to wax a trans women with male genetalia and some lost their businesses). Some people also have a problem with trans women in women’s bathrooms and locker rooms although I don’t really.

2. Language about XX bodies (Menstruation, pregnancy, breast and ovarian health, etc) should default to using the word woman, unless there is a specific reason not to. This is because saying “people who menstruate” “uterus owners” “people with front holes” (yes this is preferred terminology in some circles) is unnecessarily confusing, and alienating to many women who have already been told by society over and over again that our bodies and reproductive organs are gross. Obviously, if an article or pamphlet is trying to reach the trans and non-binary community specifically, they can use different language as they see fit.

3. Minors should not be allowed to make permanent body alterations. Many minors change their mind about their gender identity later on. And, puberty blockers can cause permanent damage to the development of genitalia. If a minor wants to dress differently and go by a different name and pronouns that’s fine.

4. Preferring to date people who only have certain body types is not transphobic. (Yes, there are some very vocal trans people who think that having a preference for dating cis people is transphobic. I am pretty sure they’re the minority but they are very vocal so it’s hard to tell).

Ok... that’s it. To all those who legitimately want to learn the other sides actual opinions, I hope this is helpful. [/quote]

I disagree with you and find your reasons for excluding people weak (“too confusing”?).

Your positions are harmful to others. 
[/quote]

Same old same old key catchphrases, zero effort to meaningfully respond. I'm beginning to think you're just a troll.[/quote]

Nothing wrong with being concise.

I’ve already addressed your points in prior posts and I’m now on my phone so I don’t feel like typing it all out again. It’s repetitive anyway. “Too confusing” is a weak cop-out and no excuse to harm others.

[/quote]

I think in the last 15 pages I have talked about it being confusing once. Continuing to cite it as my primary argument is a weak cop out. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics