Kids sexuality, who they choose to fuck and how they want to look, just isn’t anyone else’s business, always has been a perfect signal later for broken toxic people, and now right wing bigots won’t shut up about it. Grow up. Yes I am telling an entire political party to grow up. It’s been an issue too long, if you really can’t stop your poisoned voter base and media followers to stop being this cringe, you just have to start over then. Disassociate with them. It’s over, this is such an annoying childish issue to be hearing over and over and I don’t even live in your country. Please for the love of God stop allowing wounded babies to politicise kids sexuality. It’s so tiring that none of you stop the fucking madness and approach normal political discussion when this happens. Just don’t engage. Say “no” to the bigot and engage another more grownup in debate instead.
Yes, e.g. if you have transitioned you should ideally feel less yo no dysphoria. Then again, I have very little life experience on that subject. I would guess that someone who actively does what they feel like should also feel less since they are not forced into something they do not like. And some base amount of dysphoria in life is “surely” normal.
Oh I see, trans here means like “not cis” rather than having transitioned from some assigned or assumed gender identity.
I can certainly see how not experiencing dysphoria is rare for binary trans people, because the two gender roles are pretty heavily enforced in most societies.
One time a truscum told me “I can’t me Transphobic, I’m trans, you’re stupid” she was incorrect, and she was one of the biggest transphobes I ever met (she insulted many trans women claiming they “sound like men” and that they “weren’t even trying” what an absolute asshole she was SMH.
before i was officially out, the first person i told was my mechanic… and they brought it up. and you know what they did? they asked if i went by a different name and they changed it and called me that with the new pronouns
basically what im saying is that if that complete stranger can do it anyone can so stop being a dick to trans people, transphobes
The argument is that you shouldn’t base your position of acceptance on whatever the DSM says because they’re demonstrably very fallible, but rather you should use your own arguments instead.
The DSM is fallible. Many of the diagnostic criteria will change in future versions of the DSM. In the future we are going to learn that some aspects of the current manuals are wrong, just as we have for previous ones.
But the people who will find those errors and make those updates will be, and have been, researchers and mental health experts who work in the field and have relevant experience. There’s no way that I, as some rando on the internet will have anything insightful to say on the subject. If either of us come to a conclusion that contradicts the DSM, it’s far more likely to be we are mistaken in our uninformed opinions.
Regardless, the DSM-5-tr is the manual that is CURRENTLY used by mental health professionals to diagnose mental disorders. My description of the DSM criteria is as accurate as is practical for a single sentence sarcastic comment in response to a meme.
It is possible to accept people, use preferred pronouns and names etc. while also being of the opinion of “technically you’re not trans but enby” or something. Some people just have a fetish for precisely defined taxonomies, don’t kink-shame.
I’m sorry how is clearly delineating a clade (in this case, “trans”) not crisp taxonomy.
You might, for example, come across a random dog and say “That’s not a Rotweiler that’s a dog”: It might be another named breed, it might be an incomprehensibly mixed-up street pupper, point is it’s not a Rotweiler but still a dog.
Ok, but even if we follow your dehumanising analogy, non-binary people are still trans
So claiming "“technically you’re not trans but enby” is never going to be "precisely defined taxonomy", no matter how much you'd love for transphobes to have their "kink" of deliberately mislabelling people to exclude them from a category they factually belong to.
Transgender = a person who identifies as a different gender to what they were assigned at birth. This includes non binary people, as well as agender, gender non conforming, and so on.
You wanting to exclude yourself from the trans community for whatever reasons (almost certainly a combination of internalised and/or regular old transphobia) doesn't change that.
But hey, don't take my word for it, you could have easily found that out for yourself if you weren't so intent on being "not like other trans people":
Oh wait sorry I assumed the other inclusion direction, that trans folks are enbies – it’s not what you said, but how I would organise the taxonomy if I was the taxonomy Emperor (which I am not). Though just having three categories (cis, trans, enby) without inclusion relation also makes sense.
category they factually belong to
All categories are man-made. Philosophers and Linguists would have a field day with that one.
Let’s deescalate a bit. Anecdotal case, please don’t ask me for the source, but once upon a time there was someone identifying as a trans man. Got top surgery. After some soul-searching and being thoroughly dissatisfied with the bottom surgery options available, he decided “aw shucks” and decided to henceforth identify as a butch lesbian, saying “The issue wasn’t so much having a pussy but having a dick that’s not mine in vicinity to it”. Goes by she/they.
Cis, enby or trans? Gay or straight? At which point in time? Snowflake? (well, who isn’t).
Stuff like that is why it’s important to remember to not make categories normative – both in the “you are X therefore you must do Y” sense, as well as “If it is bipedal and has no feathers then it’s a human” kind of sense (which includes plucked chickens, ask Plato). They are descriptive at best, and noone uses the exact same definitions. Some say that’s hot tea, other say it’s warm. Do we need to wage wars over that while there’s people around who deny temperature?
What happened to “That’s, you know, your opinion, man”?
What legislatures and all those "wise" men don't ever comprehend is, everybody has sexual dysphoria at some point. They went through it also, no matter how "hetero" they turned out, and it's no badge of honor that going through such things resulted in them being empty headed nitwits with no moral concern for hurting others going through it.
I say, be trans ESPECIALLY BECAUSE it irritates the shit out of these assholes. Shake up the status quo and knock those old farts on their whiny white asses.
Ultimately it’s none of my business. It’s between the trans person and their doctor, as long as they’re following best practices and the plan of care is agreed to by the patient and the doctor, I’m good. I don’t pretend to know better than someone living that reality. I wish them well and hope their transition goes well and they can find happiness in their body.
A trans person can shoot dutasteride directly into their eyeball if they want or gurgle horse urine against the specific advice of a physician and it would still be fine.
I think the thrust of their point is it's between the individual and their doctor if they want to pursue medical things. The state should not be prescribing what they can/can't do in this domain and getting in the way of their relationship with their doctor. Much like the argument that keeping a pregnancy/aborting is between a pregnant individual and their doctor. It's a shorthand way of putting it we all sort of get. Yes they should be able to do it because it's their body but generally the whole thing involves a doctor one way or another.
I think the thrust of their point is it's between the individual and their doctor if they want to pursue medical things.
And my point is it isn't.
Saying, "It's between an individual and their doctor." implies there could be a time when a person wants to ingest something or do something to their body that affects nobody but them (vaccinations I still advocate the administration of at gunpoint) and they shouldn't be allowed to because a doctor said no.
Doctors are their to advise, but not at the level of the individual to consent.
By all means keep antibiotics behind a key, but if a person wants to eat paint chips doctors should be there to monitor their blood for lead and explain why they maybe shouldn't, not to stop them.
I didn’t stop listening. I read what you wrote. You are not entitled to my attention, to be blunt. And vice versa!
This is a fight now, it’s not a discussion. We both made our cases, we both processed the other’s argument (I hope), and we both still disagree. Let’s just move on.
I agree and wish them well also, but what I don't get is the "transitioning" part of the trans. I'm gay and I do try to be open to whatever anyone wants to be, but it seems like it's not self-fulfilling to be always in a state of flux or "trans" without ever intending to complete the transition. Is that what "trans" is about, or am I getting it wrong? I mean even a trans person has SOME kind of genitalia, right - so don't they have a goal to become one specific gender, or is it the goal to remain genderless and always sort of in a transitory state? I'm just wondering, not judging.
Some people are happy, some people are unhappy. We should keep using best practices and academically engaging the subject to produce better health outcomes. Not using the unhappy to deny care writ large.
Basically it's a good question to ask. The issue is that question is generally used as a cudgel by transphobes.
And I agree with you and do think we need to ask questions for clarity's sake, and that transphobes are always wrong to use such things as a cudgel. Being in transition is maybe the most honest state for humans to be in. We're always in flux, changing from moment to moment.
I'm just wondering though how trans people see their transition - as a transition, or as a permanent state of not being necessarily one gender or another, or a little of all possibilities. I support them totally and am extremely outraged by laws forbidding trans people access to medical care, which is like equating them with cattle that don't have minds or individualism of their own.
So what do they urinate out of? Is there just a hole and they just use a catheter? I guess I have more questions than can be answered here. I'm not trying to be obnoxious, I'm genuinely curious about if someone stays forever in transition, or do they eventually become male or female, or is it sort of not being either one...?
See I think that’s the most important part and you hit the nail on the head. I transitioned 20 years ago and it was a lot different then. Nowadays everyone has the freedom to just be themselves, and people are getting too hung up on labels and pronouns. If everyone just pursued their own happiness and comfort in their own body, while ignoring the expectations put upon them by social media and society, they’d be a lot happier.
It’s like these younger folks feel like there’s a check list of things they need to do to “be trans”. My brother in Christ just be yourself, and if you wanna call yourself trans in the process then more power to you. There’s no rules to happiness beyond not hurting anyone else.
Honestly, I’ve been feeling this way a lot lately. Especially with the labels and and pronouns part. I’ll call anyone what they want, and I’m not gonna beleive they’re not that, but some things are getting a bit ridiculous.
Like not to long ago I learned a new term, I don’t remember what it is, but it was basically a word to describe somes sexuality when you don’t know what their sexuality is. Like someone asks Bob what sexuality Greg is, and they don’t know for certain.
But A) The term used an acronym for not/non and put it at the beginning of asexual, so it was not not asexual… or just sexual… I guess.
B) If someone asks, you can just say you don’t know. We don’t need a word to describe someone’s sexuality as “I don’t know.”
I’m trying not to sound like an old person, and I do get why a lot of terms are uses. But it seems like every few months I hear about a new one, and it just seems like someone made it just to have a new term. I like that people are exploring and we are learning more
Other posts I’ve seen are things like “Can get guys/lesbians be gay guys/lesbians if they like non-binary people?”… Sure, why not? If someone wants to still use the term gay or lesbian, cool. If they think that puts them more towards bi to an extent, cool.
“Bi is transphobic, and if you would date trans people you’re actually pan” Or they just grew up with the term bi, and that’s how they identify. It’s not an issue.
I’m just waiting for the day when I get called transphobic for being gay, which means I only date men and not trans men, so that I can point out that trans men are men, and we don’t need to make it more complicated than just gay.
I agree with nearly all of your post except “being gay, which means I only date men and not trans men”. That’s completely valid that it is your preference, but many men identify as gay and do date trans men. They don’t need to change their label or use another word to express that they are open to transmen.
Oh yeah, I’m not denying those men exist. I’m just saying I wouldn’t be surprised if some people start saying that like they do about people identifying as bi.
Add comment