Irrelevant.I keep seeing the word syndrome there. Mutations happen.
Irrelevant.I keep seeing the word syndrome there. Mutations happen.
Chromosomes aren't that simple. You're leaning on pseudoscience. To elucidate, here are some common chromosomal variations:
48,XXYY syndrome (1 in 18-50,000)
XXX syndrome (1 in 1,000)
46,XX males (1 in 20,000)
XYY syndrome (1 in 1,000)
Klinefelter's syndrome (47,XXY, 48,XXXY or 49,XXXXY) (1-500 / 1-50,000 depending on variant)
Turner's syndrome (45,X) (1 in 2,500)
Irrelevant.
Trans people are already in your unisex areas changing their passports. Anyway, do you seriously think trans people don't know this already? I just don't understand what motivates you to want to follow them around carrying a "trans!!!" sign or whatever.The use of an inflammatory word like "weirdo" not withstanding, transgendered people need to accept that they are "different" and people will always treat them in situations where biology or the presumption of gender matters. Relationships, unisex areas, legal documents such as passports, etc.
Dear reader, let me (as a trans woman) assure you of something. No trans person is under any sort of delusion about the physical structure of our bodies. Every trans person is acutely aware of every tiny infinitesimal way our bodies differ from a typical (or at least stereotypical) cis person's body. Many of us know more about biology as it pertains to sex and gender than most medical professionals do. Every one of us knows exactly what you mean and why you think it when you say "I think women have vaginas I think you call a person with a vagina a woman". We've all heard it before; we've heard it all before.
There is no debate. You're clinging to bizarre (do you look at your partner's chromosomes as you evaluate how suitable they are to be your life partner?) pseudo-scientific nonsense.Irrelevant? It's the entire point of this debate. The topic we're having is about redefining the terms "male" and "female" which are well defined, hold widely understood meaning and are used as they stand in practice to select suitable life partners. When something doesn't meet those definitions, it's an exception. It's a syndrome. We use qualifiers to describe them because the fact they do not meet the norm is significant to people. Your post is practically off topic as it misses the point entirely.
I am amazed at what can become a "big deal". This barely registers with me. I hope people get over it.
Trans people are already in your unisex areas changing their passports. Anyway, do you seriously think trans people don't know this already? I just don't understand what motivates you to want to follow them around carrying a "trans!!!" sign or whatever.
There is no debate. You're clinging to bizarre (do you look at your partner's chromosomes as you evaluate how suitable they are to be your life partner?) pseudo-scientific nonsense.
Perhaps reading the material I have generously provided to you (rather than just looking at the names) would help a bit.
Yes, but let's not pretend putting a mental gender on a passport rather than a biological one, or walking into a woman's change room with a penis isn't a big deal when it happens. I don't want trans people walking around with a sign saying "I wasn't born a boy/girl", but you're being completely disingenuous if you pretend that conversation doesn't come up long before a man proposes to his post-op trans girlfriend. Because transexuals know it matters. Why are we pretending it doesn't with this semantic dance?
Decades of human study do not trump a thousand years of the English language and millennia of reproductive imperatives that state males have XY chromosomes and females have XX. You can use whatever pronoun you wish, but the distinction is important because the majority of people out there will never choose to enter into a relationship with a person who doesn't meet the dictionary definition. Even some people in the LGBT "community." Their valuing that distinction does not make them ignorant, uneducated or bigoted, no matter how many times you say it. I'll happily be your friend, colleague or confidante, but I'm not going to pretend the differences aren't real.
I know this may come as a shock but chromosomal variations aren't as simple as XX vagina, XY penis, and everything else scary X-Men "mutations" who can't have kids.I make it a matter of principle to ensure they have a vagina. Yes, I know I'm discriminating against some unfortunate ladies that nature dealt a bum hand to here. That's the real world we live in.
Some marriages (disclaimer: I'm not speaking from experience here) fail over one partner or the other's ability to bear children irrespective of any of this trans debate. This stuff matters to people.
Great post.
That's the real world we live in.
Chromosomes don't matter. Respect peoples' gender identity and stop trying to put gendered labels on their bodies. End of story.
What the fuck are you talking about? Of course academic study trumps common usage of the language. Languages are fluid, and change to describe the world as our understanding of the world becomes deeper and more accurate. That's seriously, like, Fact #1 about languages.
And your ability to understand the conversation is severely lacking if you think that 'reproductive imperatives' or biological sex in general has anything but an extremely fleeting, tangential relationship with what's being discussed here. Your 'distinction' is not important in any scenario besides the one where reproduction is a part of the conversation. It simply isn't, in any case that is at all relevant to this conversation. To bring up that 'distinction' as though it matters, in cases where it obviously doesn't, is meaningless noise at best, and at worst is blatant dogwhistle transphobia.
The distinction that matters in this discussion is gender identity, not biological sex. If you can't cope with the idea of a world that includes that kind of complexity and want to outright deny the existence of gender as a separate entity from biological sex, then nobody can force you to change your mind, but people are going to, quite rightly, treat you as though you're trying to enter a conversation about astrophysics by insisting that heliocentricism is just "PC bullshit" and that "obviously the Sun has risen in the east for thousands of years, so stop trying to change the language".
I know this may come as a shock but chromosomal variations aren't as simple as XX vagina, XY penis, and everything else scary X-Men "mutations" who can't have kids.
man if only somebody linked you straight to solid medical information with regards to this subject
I did all this yesterday. You can have whatever gender identity you want. I will address you with whatever pronoun you want. But the crux of the matter is, in my head you will always be male or female as defined right there.
I found Gabe and Sophie's exchange interesting is that she doesn't like the "male has a penis, female has a vagina" comments because she finds it hurtful that people don't think of her as a "real" woman. But regardless of how we re-badge the language, or how careful we are in addressing people like Sophie, that is exactly what is going on in people's heads. You are dismissing as "irrelevant" millions of years of evolutionary and biological imperatives. Is this about how we treat other people at this point or about pretending someone is something they are not according to a useful English language yardstick?
I'm well aware and have already acknowledged your post about abnormalities.I have also twice linked the dictionary definitions I use to draw the line between male and female, and that the general public finds useful for multitudinous reasons, not least of which is procreation.
In other words, you believe in a flat earth.
That's what I thought I was doing, but apparently, I am seriously, literally, not doing that even a little bit. Because:Reductio ad absurdum.
This is every bit as absurd as I was being. It's a simple, one-sentence statement. I don't have to "read into it" to come out with a particular meaning, and I don't have to insult you or put words in your mouth to make it sound worse. All I have to do is take that statement at face value.I believe fully what people are saying about a mental gender identity, but it won't change a thing about what box my brain puts those people into.
Reductio ad absurdum.
I believe fully what people are saying about a mental gender identity, but it won't change a thing about what box my brain puts those people into. And if that's the issue Sophie and company have -- what other people feel -- they are wasting their time with the linguistic gymnastics.
That's what I thought I was doing, but apparently, I am seriously, literally, not doing that even a little bit. Because:
This is every bit as absurd as I was being. It's a simple, one-sentence statement. I don't have to "read into it" to come out with a particular meaning, and I don't have to insult you or put words in your mouth to make it sound worse. All I have to do is take that statement at face value.
"I believe fully what people are saying about a mental gender identity, but it won't change a thing about what box my brain puts those people into."
"I believe fully in the space shuttle and the moon landing and satellites, but it won't change a thing about what curvature of the Earth's surface."
The underlying logic behind these statements is 100% equivalent. I don't even need to make an argument, here. I just need to point out the one that you've made yourself.
In other words, you believe in a flat earth.
Well, with you, maybe. But obviously it's possible for society to go from consisting almost entirely of people who put people into particular mental boxes to consisting almost entirely of people who put people into entirely different mental boxes, or maybe even no boxes at all. Or where they only use those boxes in really specific situations that have no bearing on most of their interactions.
Are you saying that trying to change how people feel is a waste of time? Or is it just that you don't think that, on this issue, how people feel can be changed? Or is it that language isn't the way to do this? We seem to have made pretty huge strides in changing how people feel about gay people, and those mental boxes are similarly tied up in sex and babies and all that. I'm inclined to think that public demands for respect have helped a lot there, directly and indirectly. One could say here too that gay rights activists are going against "millions of years" of biological imperatives - there are people who do say this!
My feeling is that you're underestimating the power of language to shape thought. If enough of us outwardly respect people, pretty soon they'll be respected. Edit: I think it's hard to argue that you have a duty to not use those mental boxes. But you have a duty to recognize that it would be better if you used different boxes - as you say, that you can't is just because it's hard for people to control their own psychology. And there's a duty to try to bring it about that new people don't end up using the same boxes you use, and, hopefully, over time you won't have this unfortunate irrational tic to nearly the same extent that you do now.
I don't disagree with anything you're saying, but ultimately as long as I treat people how they want to be treated it shouldn't matter what box I put them into. But when context does become important, you're still going to need a word for "female" that is unambiguous and that's my issue with this whole debate. It's a perfectly good word. If you've got a superset of individuals that don't fit it, maybe it calls for a new word, and if you're right and society adopts the all inclusive terminology then maybe "female" becomes politically incorrect in 50 years time.
I'm not trying to specifically single you out, but this is the kind of casual ignorance of trans bodies that is mostly the problem - people assuming something is one way and being wrong about it. Trans women on hormone replacement therapy don't need prostate exams (the anti-androgen they take is often actually also used to shrink the prostate in men with prostate cancer!), but they do need mammograms - they have the same breast cancer risks as cis women and virtually no risk of prostate cancer. Obviously this particular incidence doesn't have much bearing on the discussion, but it's a good example of how it's possible to be wrong about something you don't think you're wrong about simply because you haven't really looked into it.If you still have a penis and a prostate, you still have to go to the proctologist.
I'm not trying to specifically single you out, but this is the kind of casual ignorance of trans bodies that is mostly the problem - people assuming something is one way and being wrong about it. Trans women on hormone replacement therapy don't need prostate exams (the anti-androgen they take is often actually also used to shrink the prostate in men with prostate cancer!), but they do need mammograms - they have the same breast cancer risks as cis women and virtually no risk of prostate cancer. Obviously this particular incidence doesn't have much bearing on the discussion, but it's a good example of how it's possible to be wrong about something you don't think you're wrong about simply because you haven't really looked into it.
I stand corrected, then.
And you're absolutely right, I haven't really looked into transgendered people's bodies and minds. It's not a topic that has ever really affected me, and it still doesn't, really.
I am only participating in this discussion because I wish that people would understand they are saying something about me, too, when they say "transgendered people have minds trapped in bodies that don't match." They are saying they because I am a cisgendered male, I have a "male" mind, and I take exception to that. I refuse to be defined or identified by my biology.
I don't disagree with anything you're saying, but ultimately as long as I treat people how they want to be treated it shouldn't matter what box I put them into. But when context does become important, you're still going to need a word for "female" that is unambiguous and that's my issue with this whole debate. It's a perfectly good word. If you've got a superset of individuals that don't fit it, maybe it calls for a new word, and if you're right and society adopts the all inclusive terminology then maybe "female" becomes politically incorrect in 50 years time.
Mike is also known for being very Christian (he famously kicked Jerry out of his house for being an atheist), which might have influenced his comments.
You don't stand corrected. That was a classic case of moving the goal posts. You were talking about transpeople in general, not the once in or post treatment.
He could have made 1/4 of a podcast with that money.
What a monster.
I've never understood celebrities (and Gabe) having to donate a truckload of money to a charity in order to wash their hands of something they've done.
Just say sorry, maybe give a few hours of community service, and be done with it. Writing a check just seems weird to me.
I've never understood celebrities (and Gabe) having to donate a truckload of money to a charity in order to wash their hands of something they've done.
Just say sorry, maybe give a few hours of community service, and be done with it. Writing a check just seems weird to me.
It's a nice gesture, but yeah, would be encouraging in the long run if he attempted in the future to understand the wrong. Being an idiot with the heart in the right place kinda grows stale when you don't learn from one's mistakes. Here's hoping?
How is he not "understanding the wrong"? I'm not sure what kind of mea culpa some still want from him.
Agreed. Writing a check is nice, but it isn't being accountable. He says he's talking to people, he says he's trying. I hope it's true. Here are some things I'd like to see him do:It's a nice gesture, but yeah, would be encouraging in the long run if he attempted in the future to understand the wrong. Being an idiot with the heart in the right place kinda grows stale when you don't learn from one's mistakes. Here's hoping?
He'll try to make restitution and people will just think he's trying to buy his way out of controversy.
He has the opportunity to make up for his shit and, in the process, turn his work and Penny Arcade into a positive force in video game culture.
Agreed. Writing a check is nice, but it isn't being accountable. He says he's talking to people, he says he's trying. I hope it's true. Here are some things I'd like to see him do:
He is in a significant position of influence within gaming culture. He has the opportunity to make up for his shit and, in the process, turn his work and Penny Arcade into a positive force in video game culture. I would absolutely love to see him take up that opportunity.
- Genuinely work with others to understand why his behavior is problematic.
- Publicly acknowledge his problematic behavior, how it was problematic, and how his attitudes have since changed.
- I want this to be an ongoing process. He has written shitty transphobic things repeatedly, and now I want to see him repeatedly and publicly discuss how he's working to unlearn those attitudes.
- While he's at it, he has a lot to make up for regarding the repeated rape jokes he's made.
- In the future I want to see him listen when people call him out on transphobic, sexist, and otherwise oppressive behavior. At the very least, I want him to not take to his twitter / blog and say more terrible things.
How is he not "understanding the wrong"? I'm not sure what kind of mea culpa some still want from him.
I don't want blood or a mea culpa from him, don't be ridiculous. What I want for him is to reflect and approach the subject more thoughtfully in the future. That's all. Ultimately he's only accountable to himself on that score, but I wish it nonetheless.It seems like every time one of these issues come up people want blood. Victories are recorded in careers damaged and reputations destroyed.
He made some stupid comments. He tried to own up to them and people won't accept it. He'll try to make restitution and people will just think he's trying to buy his way out of controversy.
The same way I mentally categorise every other person by hair colour, race, religion and every other piece of minutiae that defines them.
Chromosomes aren't that simple. You're leaning on pseudoscience. To elucidate, here are some common chromosomal variations:
48,XXYY syndrome (1 in 18-50,000)
XXX syndrome (1 in 1,000)
46,XX males (1 in 20,000)
XYY syndrome (1 in 1,000)
Klinefelter's syndrome (47,XXY, 48,XXXY or 49,XXXXY) (1-500 / 1-50,000 depending on variant)
Turner's syndrome (45,X) (1 in 2,500)