[Discussion] Trans Issues and Rights

This thread is for the discussion of current events relating to trans rights, for discussion of the lives of trans people and difficulties they face, and for basic questions about the lives and experiences of trans people. (If basic questions become dominant we'll look at making a Q&A thread at that time.)

nel e nel wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

There is nothing magical about a penis(my own excluded)

Slight derail, but we all just glossed over the fact that Sally has a magic penis. Carry on.

That's nasty!

sometimesdee wrote:
nel e nel wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

There is nothing magical about a penis(my own excluded)

Slight derail, but we all just glossed over the fact that Sally has a magic penis. Carry on.

That's nasty!

That's why it's magical.

Living in Greece has provided many culture shocks. One is that the American view of bodies and nudity...is somewhere between Puritanical and obsessively sexualized. Kids change swim suits on the beach here, out in the open, til age 10. Girls don't wear tops until puberty has just begun. Many men's swimsuits are...revealing or barely exist.

I explain to my students that while you can see 3d close ups of bullets going through brains on primetime tv, you won't see the top of one butt crack, so to speak. They don't really believe me.

tl;dr maybe Republicans should stop obsessing/scoping penises.

Malor wrote:
Bonus_Eruptus wrote:
nel e nel wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

There is nothing magical about a penis(my own excluded)

Slight derail, but we all just glossed over the fact that Sally has a magic penis. Carry on.

For most of us, it's common knowledge.

A rather, er, friendly fellow, I gather?

One of our friendliest members.

sometimesdee wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:

edit: eh, on second thought, I really shouldn't play Parent's Advocate in this place.

Thanks for that. As much as we make fun of you for it, I do love when people self-edit.

Thanks. I understand this place has to be a bubble to some extent because there are too few places that feel safe so when you find one, you don't let it go.

and like I said, *I'm* going to start defending parents? Even for me, that's a client too far.

Hypatian wrote:

(Or to quote Anatole France: "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.")

I love this quote, it gets to the heart of explaining while equal under the law leaves a whole lot of room to not be equal.

MattDaddy's whole premise is bullsh*t.. just like back in the day when they segregated black people to separate bathrooms and sections on public transport etc..Some of the same bullsh*t excuses to keep black people from enjoying the same rights as whites is now being used on the LGBTQ peeps.

Again the marginalized are forced to tolerate the intolerance of others.. that's not how this works.

TheGameguru wrote:

MattDaddy's whole premise is bullsh*t.. just like back in the day when they segregated black people to separate bathrooms and sections on public transport etc..Some of the same bullsh*t excuses to keep black people from enjoying the same rights as whites is now being used on the LGBTQ peeps.

Again the marginalized are forced to tolerate the intolerance of others.. that's not how this works.

I can't believe in 2016 there are actual suggestions of separate bathrooms as an acceptable compromise. I expect the same bigoted BS from the one side but "separate but equal" middle ground confuses me to no end.

I'd prefer not to drag up posts that have since been moved on from, but I would like to say that the discussion helped shed light on the topic of anatomy and gender. I was born and raised in a society that determines gender based on which reproductive organs an individual has. Men have a penis. Women have a vagina. For a lot of people everything aligns with that designation just fine. With no diverse friends or family to challenge that teaching it's difficult to grasp anything in contrast. A man with a vagina. A woman with a penis. Prior to becoming part of this community that would have been nonsense to me. Now I understand it is possible. Anatomy can defy gender.

Upon reading one view or another it led me to think if I was to have a vagina instead of a penis, simple anatomical chance, that I'd still be exactly who I am now and present myself in the same way, as a man. Believe it or not, I had never considered this. It was like a glass wall shattered to allow me to walk through and into a better understanding. Better. Not complete.

The next leap is to have a female body entirely, but be exactly the same person inside. This confuses me a little between my simply being a lesbian in that instance as oppose to becoming a transgender man. What is it other than which gender one wishes to partner with that determines the difference? Maybe it's impossible to grasp without living it. Something gender related that simply feels completely wrong. I may not realise how much I need to portray myself as a man until I was unable to.

The first thing I came to realise back when, was that transgender individuals are not the stereotypes they are made out to be, by media. It was ingrained that these people were dishonest and probably a sexual predator. I'm ashamed to say I bought into that. I had no one and no where to learn otherwise from. It completely skewed my point of view.

Getting to know ClockworkHouse, even just a little, really smashed through the misconceptions. Reading her posts across various threads had me saying "She could be me, if not someone I'd have been great friends with..." and it hit hard upon discovery that she is transgender. I wasn't anything like the portrayals and neither was she. That was important, because I am not transgender. She is. Yet we are, in parts, very similar. Now she is much more intelligent and better educated, but in upbringing, interests, humour, age, and the like, I saw parts of myself. Irrespective of that she is someone I respect and trust, oddly, for not being that close. The point is the issue was suddenly humanised and made somewhat personal. This had never been the case. It wasn't supposed to be the case according to media representation.

I see parts of myself then, in others now. People can change for the better. Being uneducated on the subject and having opinions formed on lies, deceit, and misunderstanding, doesn't mean someone is a lost cause or a horrible person. I'm sure some folks may have written me off. Maybe worse. It would have been a fair assessment at the time. I think I'm a better human being now, who can somewhat help eradicate misinformation where possible, and offer support when possible. I highly doubt anyone would have predicted that.

The burden of responsibility to learn the error of my ways was on me. I was helped by those who didn't look to attack, though. That's no doubt incredibly difficult and tiring. Nevertheless, it's so much more effective than aggression or condescension. Without these people, these heroes, we're left with ignorance or friction. Keep doing what you're doing. It makes a huge difference for the better.

I don't particularly like the concept of gender as I feel that it restricts us into various cultural roles that otherwise wouldn't exist. Outside of societal brainwashing, I wouldn't be any different inside regardless of whatever "parts" I was physically born with. It's interesting how when I play MMO's, and I have both male and female characters, how differently they are sometimes treated based on the gender people perceive them (and the real life person) to be, and yet they are all controlled by the same "me". The idea of male and female doesn't make a lot of sense to me outside of the physical (and even those physical aspects are challenged) so why do we even have, or need, gender? What useful purpose does it really serve?

That's a good question, and a complicated one. I think that on the one hand, one might argue that we should just discard gender as a concept. Why must we distinguish ourselves from each other in this way? Why should we treat people differently because of this?

One goal we might take from this is to destroy discrimination on the basis of gender/sex/etc. Let people have these differences, but don't distinguish in how we treat them.

Another goal we might take is to destroy the distinction completely. Let people behave however they want, but gender is no longer a thing.

The big concern I have about that second one is that people are really really good at putting things into boxes. If we have separate ideas of "gender", "genital anatomy", "hormone balance", etc. then it's reasonably easy to say "look, I have a penis, but my hormone balance is estrogen dominated, and I consider myself to be a woman".

If we discard the "gender" part of that... people are still going to categorize people by whether they have a penis or a vagina or something else... and we won't have anything to point to to say "no, really, that categorization isn't right".

So now, we have the chance that we'll just end up with people discriminating on the basis of penis vs. vulva, and we're kind of back where we started, even though we've "destroyed the concept of gender". Yes, we can choose not to discriminate on that basis, but "destroying gender" didn't actually get us very far.

Going at things from the other side: I think it's reasonably easy to see how rejecting all of these things as valid bases for discrimination is a good thing. People should not be discriminated against based on the gender, or their parts, or their hormones, or how they dress, or who they shack up with, or... etc. And if we take that rule as the basis then... having "gender" be a thing that exists along with the rest is really no big deal.

Or to put it a different way:

Eliminating the concept of gender is neither necessary to prevent traditional gender-or-sex-based-discrimination, nor is it sufficient to do so.

And to add a wrinkle to all of this: consider that in all of this, we've probably been thinking only in terms of western European categories of gender--and there are many slightly different and sometimes richer conceptions of gender in the world. Not just in terms of "how does one perform masculinity?" but "what genders exist and how do they differ?" So the situation is potentially a lot more complicated than this, too.

So that's my logical argument. I think that we certainly ought to change and de-emphasize the way we think about gender, but I have no problem with people dividing themselves up into various groups on some abstract bases. My problem is with those abstract groupings being used to make assumptions about other parts of how a person does and ought to interact with society.

Now for the less logical side: I feel gender. Not everybody does, but I do. My best guess at what's really going on underneath it all is that there's some pheromonal or something signal that tells me "these are my people", and it points me at women and tells me "you are like these people, and not like those people".

I don't particularly know where it comes from. It doesn't particularly influence how I feel I ought to look or behave, except insofar as making it very hard for me to feel okay about myself if the people I interact with on an everyday basis can't treat me as the woman I am. This means, for me, that I have to wear a wig when I'm not in private with only people I'm very very close to if I want to feel comfortable. Because if I don't, people will not see me for who I am. But outside that? I try to push my boundaries and wear dresses and skirts sometimes these days... but I have to push myself to do that. I'm very much a tomboy. I very much do not fall into "traditional" assumptions about how a woman ought to comport herself, or who she ought to be attracted to. And I see no need to change that.

Anyway, with all that together...

My overall feeling is similar to the feeling I have about a lot of cultural artifacts: the richer the better. The more different ways of expressing ourselves are accepted, the more amazing the world becomes, and the more clear that discrimination is ridiculous. When you have men, women, non-binary and agender people on your staff, making assumptions about what things men and women are good at is much more clearly ridiculous. When you have cis and trans people mixed together, the mere existence of trans people kind of brings the hammer down on assumptions about things men or women are good at. When you have people of all races and ethnicities together, it is that much more apparent that every person must be treated as an individual, that there are no assumptions you can make on any of these bases.

So that's my stance: the best approach is not to eliminate gender, but to be pluralistic about it. Don't force everyone into the same gender box in order to make gender distinction go away, because then we'll just invent more different kinds of boxes to use instead. Instead, make the gender box huge and overflowing with choices—because that way, privileging one gender gets more and more difficult (and pointless!)

In the end, both of these approaches "destroy gender" in a way. One, by forcing the distinctions to be about other things instead of about gender. The other, by making the field so large that each individual is a class unto themselves. Either way, you end up with a world where people must be treated and taken as individuals.

BTW: this is one of the most frustrating things to trans people about the trans-exclusionary radical feminists. Radical feminism is essentially about dismantling gender, because it's a tool of the patriarchy. Trans feminism starts just after we've already taken gender away from patriarchy as a weapon and turned it into a flower or something. :> Once we see past the transphobia society has taught us, we live with gender that is dismantled and broken down and... open to everyone to use or not use as they please.

Yes, you're so right about how we seem to insist on categorizing and putting people into boxes. Even if it turned out that eliminating gender was "the answer," I have very strong doubts that we would be capable of doing it even if we wanted to. I would really love to see what gender would be like without discrimination. Would I still feel bothered in some ways by the concept of it? Or would I view it as simply another aspect of a person that makes that person unique? I also just think I have a lot of trouble figuring out what it is exactly that makes one gender different from another gender. It is a lot easier for me to think of each person as an individual made up of a bunch of different things than it is for me to think in broader terms of gender.

I suppose it also may be more difficult for me too because I don't really strongly feel a gender on the inside or even really know what it means. I could easily adapt to whatever body I was put into and behave accordingly per any required social masks. It generally surprises me when people admit to feeling uncomfortable with this type of idea, like for example women who only play female characters in games because it would "feel weird" playing as a male and so they never do. I've just never had that "feel weird" feeling. Sometimes I "feel weird" not having it.

With you there, folks. I don't label myself as man or woman, but to me self-labeling is fine. Labeling others and expecting them to play the roles we have in our heads is what leads to trouble.

Maybe it' even more accurate if instead of calling it self-labeling, we should call it something more like "believing people when they tell you the label they wound up with through the same indelible process you wound up with your label"?

I mean, something shorter and catchier than that, but along those lines?

cheeze_pavilion wrote:

Maybe it' even more accurate if instead of calling it self-labeling, we should call it something more like "believing people when they tell you the label they wound up with through the same indelible process you wound up with your label"?

I mean, something shorter and catchier than that, but along those lines?

I agree. 'Self-labeling' might imply an element of choice that I'm not intending. What I mean by it is closer to self-identification as in, "If you're looking to call me something, call me this as it's closest to where I naturally fit."

A friend offered to make me a bug-out bag, y'all. I thought about turning him down, but I said yes.

Still kind of processing that.

Freyja wrote:

A friend offered to make me a bug-out bag, y'all. I thought about turning him down, but I said yes.

Still kind of processing that.

It sucks to think you could need one for the reason that I'm assuming it was suggested. But! You never know! It may come in handy for a totally unrelated incident such as armageddon. It pays to be prepared. *thinks* I should really get me one of those.

I had to Google "bug-out bag" to figure out what it was.

Sucks that you even have to consider it, but we have been, too. It's the reason I started buying Altoids last week.

If things got that bad, I'd just off myself. Life is already miserable enough without it being fascist or apocalyptic nightmare.

RnRClown wrote:
Freyja wrote:

A friend offered to make me a bug-out bag, y'all. I thought about turning him down, but I said yes.

Still kind of processing that.

It sucks to think you could need one for the reason that I'm assuming it was suggested. But! You never know! It may come in handy for a totally unrelated incident such as armageddon. It pays to be prepared. *thinks* I should really get me one of those.

I had to Google "bug-out bag" to figure out what it was. :P

+1. I'm sorry for the reason, but it's not a bad idea to have a 72-hour survival kit anyway. Most of the supplies can be bought directly from the Red Cross, so it's pretty easy to assemble one. Which means I don't have any excuse not to have finished mine already before the mega-quake hits, but I'm getting there.

I too as of yesterday have a bug out bag. I mean, I had a get home bag but it's more serious now.

I hope things never get that bad, Boog. You would very much be missed.

So about all that 'fear mongering' I've been up to, according to some:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...

Also, given I was also told that conscience in healthcare doesn't mean people are able to refuse me healthcare for being trans:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyra_H...

SEC. 3. PROTECTION OF THE FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS AND MORAL CONVICTIONS.

(b) Discriminatory Action Defined.—As used in subsection (a), a discriminatory action means any action taken by the Federal Government to—

*snip*

(5) otherwise discriminate against such person.

So...that's horrifically vague enough to be interpreted in any number of ways In fact pretty much the whole thing is to be honest.

I'm guessing this will only apply to Christians, of course.

Why a Minn. mom is suing her transgender teen and the clinic that gave her hormones
(Katie Mettler, Washington Post, 2016-11-18)

Hint: If you can't tell that your kid is transitioning, the law that provides in this case for a near-adult to be treated as emancipated if you're ignoring them and they're supporting themselves almost certainly applies.

Grrrr.

This makes me so angry and I fear for that kid's well being in the future if she's stuck with her scumbag father....

Canadian mother calls for gender identity training after court ruling

A Canadian mother has called for lawyers and judges to receive better training on gender identity after two judges in the province of Alberta ordered her four-year-old child to stop wearing girls’ clothing in public.
In February, a second judge upheld the ruling, and also granted the father primary custody of the child, with Smith allowed limited access.

In September, a third provincial judge overturned the clothing restriction after consulting with a parenting expert. The child, said the judge, must now be provided with male and female clothing options and then can choose from these options.

Smith said the consecutive orders – all issued within a nine-month span – have taken a toll on the child, who is now five. “When my child was removed and placed with Dad, they internalised it and took it like they did something wrong. They were being bad because the judge doesn’t like them to be a girl.”

Smith said her complaint – and the remedy she’s demanding – will do little to help her in her ongoing court battle to regain custody of her child. But she hopes it will prevent other families from experiencing what she and her child have been through in the past year. “This has been so hard on my kid,” she said, her voice shaking as she fought back tears.

My kid then started talking about dying. At four, they didn’t feel that the world wanted them to be a girl. That they were no good,” she said. “My kid was asking me, mom, does it hurt to die, how can I die, where would I go when I die? Mom now that you know, when I die, grow me in your belly but grow me as a girl, not with a penis. Because now you know.”

We have so many crap judges, especially on the Prairies. The problem everywhere is they go from their privileged lifestyles in expensive cars directly into enclosed garages, then scuttle through a habitrail before confronting the rest of humanity. Christ, at least send them to Burning Man so they can get some exposure to different lifestyles.

Apologies if this got caught by the early iteration of the thread, but Canada's first transgender judge was sworn in earlier this year.

Oh Pyxi, the bolded part literally made me cry. My eldest son just turned five and if he could talk, if he said those things.... my heart would just break in a billion pieces. I can't begin to imagine what that child has been through. Just heartbreaking.

So tomorrow (the 20th) is trans day of remembrance, in this post Trump-era I'm really worried about any gathered minority groups, even if they're doing so in mourning, but to not do so would be to allow fear to win.

May our fallen siblings know peace and our living ones survive to see things get back on track.

It's TDoR.

https://tdor.info/