Cont: Trans Women are not Women II: The Bath Of Khan

Status
Not open for further replies.
ponderingturtle said:
Depends if you are on a trans friendly employer and own a house then they are less of issues. Using bathrooms and being outed are constant issues for all trans people. These are certainly all issues, why do we have to deal with them in some specific sequence?
Click to expand...

Priorities.

Don't you do that in your life?

I have $20 and need food for dinner, but I really want that new Post Malone CD.

Wut do?
 
JoeMorgue said:
1. Actual sexual biological differences that you can't change (outside of actual medical sexual reassignment surgery).

2. Social roles placed on the sexes (Men have to do this, Women have to do this, Girls are expected to do this, boys are expected to do this) that we should be working to get rid of.
3. A magical third category I keep getting told exists that seems to consist of nothing but the parts of #2 that people want to keep for the sole purpose of subverting.

What am I missing? What variable am I not accounting for?
Click to expand...
Re: the highlighted
completely agree, social roles of gender seem to be a big part of the issue and we should be getting rid of them.

Get rid of the idea that certain genders should act a certain way, then genders are free to act anyway they want.

End result could possibly be that everyone is ok with their own gender, no need to try and fit a 'role', because the 'roles' don't exist anymore.
 
Steve said:
Why would you do that?
Click to expand...

Because that was what was being asked for, an experiment that could be performed to demonstrate the existence of someone's gender identity that could not equally be said to demonstrate the existence of someone's soul.

caveman1917 said:
Yes, by mumblethrax's argument a soul is phenomenal because the same experiment that allows you to determine someone's gender identity (namely asking them "do you have a gender identity?") also allows you to determine someone's soul (namely asking them "do you have a soul?"). That is, unless mumblethrax comes up with a different experiment to determine someone's gender identity that is not based on merely asking the person in question.
Click to expand...

Darat proposed the experiment "you ask people" so I asked whether he then thereby agreed that the existence of someone's soul could be determined by the same experiment. He simply stated "Funny" in response, and since I have no interest in playing these games I decided to take that as a yes.
 
p0lka said:
social roles of gender seem to be a big part of the issue and we should be getting rid of them.
Click to expand...

Do you have a persuasive argument that every gendered aspect of modern life does more harm than good?

Women's fashion? Women's sport? Women's locker rooms? Women's conferences? Hen parties?

I'm a bit skeptical whether you've thought this stance through, front-to-back.
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Do you have a persuasive argument that every gendered aspect of modern life does more harm than good?

Women's fashion? Women's sport? Women's locker rooms? Women's conferences? Hen parties?

I'm a bit skeptical whether you've thought this stance through, front-to-back.
Click to expand...
my issue is with gender roles. When people feel unhappy with themselves because they dont fit into a particular gender role, it's the gender role that is the problem and not the people. Just be yourself.

Get rid of gender expectations and maybe there would be less people getting hung up about their gender, cos it just wouldn't matter.
 
p0lka said:
my issue is with gender roles. When people feel unhappy with themselves because they dont fit into a particular gender role, it's the gender role that is the problem and not the people...
Click to expand...

What sorts of gendered roles would you seek to eliminate and how? A few examples would be super helpful here.
 
p0lka said:
By not teaching our offspring to conform to them. If they want to thats fine, but there should be no pressure to conform to them.
Click to expand...

So it's okay to keep all sorts of gender roles around, but only if they are informally socially enforced by kindergarteners and grade schoolers (not to mention reinforced by mass marketers) rather than taught by parents?
 
d4m10n said:
So it's okay to keep all sorts of gender roles around, but only if they are informally socially enforced by kindergarteners and grade schoolers (not to mention reinforced by mass marketers) rather than taught by parents?
Click to expand...
Oh, that's a lot of words you put into my mouth, lol.

Anyway, no, there should not be any gender roles at all, there should be no pressure from society to conform to a role because of gender.

I'm of the opinion that a lot of people who struggle with gender issues, are doing so because of a mismatch between how they feel and how they feel they feel they should feel according to social pressure regarding gender roles.

EDIT: For example
You're getting bullied at school, everyone tells you to be a man and stand up to them,
but you're thinking to yourself
'no way, that's the last thing i would do, I'd rather run away, does that make me not a man? if that's what a man would do then maybe I'm not a man? It's not what I would do? Hmm I dont feel like a man'
etc etc
gender roles...
 
Last edited:
p0lka said:
I'm of the opinion that a lot of people who struggle with gender issues, are doing so because of a mismatch between how they feel and how they feel they feel they should feel according to social pressure regarding gender roles.
Click to expand...

Even one single example would be helpful here. Gendered roles and gendered clothing and gendered hairstyles and gendered grooming abound. Do you really think any human society is likely to give them up? Have even the most egalitarian societies made progress towards, say, unisex hairstyles, clothing, or toys?

EDIT: Just now saw your example. In my experience, other boys encouraged this sort of manliness, even when parents counseled a different approach.
 
Last edited:
p0lka said:
Anyway, no, there should not be any gender roles at all, there should be no pressure from society to conform to a role because of gender.

I'm of the opinion that a lot of people who struggle with gender issues, are doing so because of a mismatch between how they feel and how they feel they feel they should feel according to social pressure regarding gender roles.
Click to expand...

This seems to me like a textbook case of Chesterton's fence. You see that these social institutions have some cost, and so you want to get rid of them. But what if they provide some benefit? What if they're helpful to people who can conform to them? How do you know that getting rid of them won't do more harm than good?

Long-standing social institutions don't generally spring up randomly. They usually serve a purpose. Sometimes that purpose no longer applies, sometimes it isn't a good purpose. But they aren't pointless. They have a reason for existing. And if you don't understand what that purpose is, then you cannot understand the consequences of getting rid of it. You cannot know whether it's a good idea or a bad idea to do so.
 
Lol, do any of you actually go outside and interact with other human beings?

Like ever?

<snip>



Edited by Loss Leader: 
Edited for Rule 0. Remain civil.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ziggurat said:
Long-standing social institutions don't generally spring up randomly. They usually serve a purpose. Sometimes that purpose no longer applies, sometimes it isn't a good purpose. But they aren't pointless.
Click to expand...

What I find fascinating here is that the example provided has a very obvious purpose. Someone needs to stand up to bullies, may as well make that a masculine virtue. Not all masculinity is toxic; sometimes a lack of risk aversion may be socially beneficial.
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
This seems to me like a textbook case of Chesterton's fence. You see that these social institutions have some cost, and so you want to get rid of them. But what if they provide some benefit? What if they're helpful to people who can conform to them? How do you know that getting rid of them won't do more harm than good?

Long-standing social institutions don't generally spring up randomly. They usually serve a purpose. Sometimes that purpose no longer applies, sometimes it isn't a good purpose. But they aren't pointless. They have a reason for existing. And if you don't understand what that purpose is, then you cannot understand the consequences of getting rid of it. You cannot know whether it's a good idea or a bad idea to do so.
Click to expand...


Well, for instance, there's dating. How's a guy supposed to let his preferred potential partners know he's a Bad Boy who will hit them up for bail money, treat them badly, and cheat on them, without gender-stereotyped clothing, grooming details, and mannerisms? Can, say, diamond stud earrings be an adequate substitute for a Rolex in conveying that a guy is a total jerk but rich enough to be worth a few dates anyhow?

We'd end up needing a hankie code that would make Chinese writing seem straightforward.
 
Myriad said:
Well, for instance, there's dating. How's a guy supposed to let his preferred potential partners know he's a Bad Boy who will hit them up for bail money, treat them badly, and cheat on them, without gender-stereotyped clothing, grooming details, and mannerisms? Can, say, diamond stud earrings be an adequate substitute for a Rolex in conveying that a guy is a total jerk but rich enough to be worth a few dates anyhow?

We'd end up needing a hankie code that would make Chinese writing seem straightforward.
Click to expand...

I know you're being unserious, but we actually already have such a code. Most societies do. And while it's way more sophisticated than the simple hanky code, it's been around so long, and accreted semantics so gradually, that most of us have little difficulty interpreting it. Some people do, though. And others like to mess with it, the way a poet might mess with grammar or syntax. Which is the right way to think about it, really. A code this complex is really a language, with degrees of ambiguity and flexibility of meaning that codes really can't manage or produce.
 
d4m10n said:
What I find fascinating here is that the example provided has a very obvious purpose. Someone needs to stand up to bullies, may as well make that a masculine virtue. Not all masculinity is toxic; sometimes a lack of risk aversion may be socially beneficial.
Click to expand...
I was perfectly happy for my sister to come to my rescue when I was being bullied at school. No-one would call her masculine.

Sent from my Moto C using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom