Transgender man gives birth

[sir drinks-a-lot]

Many others are also reporting a man gave birth.

...Who?

I love how your link contains links to articles reporting a man gave birth.

 

[theprestige]

What is it that you think that he thinks society owes him? Aside from courtesy and respect, I mean.

Complicity in her medically induced and insincere cosplay, obviously. I mean, sure, call her a dude if it means dodging a workplace harassment charge. But beyond that... She had a baby. Be honest, johnny karate: what do you think is going on up in that belly of hers? Boy stuff? Or girl stuff?

This signature is intended to irradiate people.

 

[johnny karate]

Complicity in her medically induced and insincere cosplay, obviously. I mean, sure, call her a dude if it means dodging a workplace harassment charge. But beyond that... She had a baby. Be honest, johnny karate: what do you think is going on up in that belly of hers? Boy stuff? Or girl stuff?

I don't actually care what's "going on up in that belly of hers"? Why do you?

And what specific "complicity" are you referring to?

 

[johnny karate]

I love how your link contains links to articles reporting a man gave birth.

From how many non-tabloid sources? One? Two?

Does that constitute "many" in your mind?

 

[mike81]

From how many non-tabloid sources? One? Two?

Does that constitute "many" in your mind?

Again, the transman himself said a man gave birth. Shouldn't that count above anything else? He was not saying it tongue in cheek like someone suggested. He clearly feels he is a man that gave birth and seems to want others to think the same. He said it more like, "Ha, ha to anyone that says a man can't give birth."

 

[johnny karate]

Again, the transman himself said a man gave birth. Shouldn't that count above anything else?

This tangent started with complaints that the media was misreporting the story. So now we're just complaining if anyone at all says something you don't agree with? Okay then.

He was not saying it tongue in cheek like someone suggested. He clearly feels he is a man that gave birth.

And this is a problem for you because... ?

He said it more like, "Ha, ha to anyone that says a man can't give birth."

How terrible for you.

 

[Brainster]

Wow. You really shouldn't go into mind-reading, because you failed spectacularly. My argument is that people who argue that trans gendered people should use the "right" locker room would be freaked out if that actually happened, and one of those trans men walked into a women's locker room.

Well, would you find anything wrong with that yourself? Trans man walks into a woman's locker room. What should happen? We know what would happen--shrieks and covering up and maybe one of the gals has been practicing boxing.

But the trans man has an explanation. Yeah, he's been a man for a couple years now, but it really isn't working out and he's thinking of transitioning back to being a woman and this is part of the process. Okay, no harm, no foul, sorry the women were upset and little Miss Right Hook is going to find out that assault and battery against a transgendered person is a hate crime.

 

[johnny karate]

Well, would you find anything wrong with that yourself? Trans man walks into a woman's locker room. What should happen? We know what would happen--shrieks and covering up and maybe one of the gals has been practicing boxing.

But the trans man has an explanation. Yeah, he's been a man for a couple years now, but it really isn't working out and he's thinking of transitioning back to being a woman and this is part of the process. Okay, no harm, no foul, sorry the women were upset and little Miss Right Hook is going to find out that assault and battery against a transgendered person is a hate crime.

But isn't that exactly what you're advocating for? That people use the locker room or restroom according to their biological gender?

If not, what locker room do you think the fictional person in the scenario that will probably never happen should use?

 

[sylvan8798]

I always laugh when your side brings up this argument. I assume you want us to acknowledge that the males who look like women probably should use the women's locker-room and the females who look like men should go to the men's locker-room. And guess what? I don't disagree with that (mostly, assuming they are post-op or keep themselves reasonably covered).

But that's not your argument. Your argument is that they should be free to go to either locker-room.

I think you are a little confused. The argument is that transgender persons should be able to use the facility that matches the gender they are presenting as. Opponents want them to use their biologically assigned facility, regardless of how they actually appear to themselves or others. There wouldn't be a fuss about it if everyone were on the same side...

 

[Belz...]

I answered your question. Did you have another?

Ah, there's that pretense of not knowing what's going on, again.

No, we were discussing minding your own business.

I don't think you know what that means, then.

You are the dishonest one in this exchange.

Clever riposte!

You are projecting.

You're not even putting any thoughts in your response. Since I'm the one trying to distinguish two things, and you're treating them as one, it's idiotic to say that I'm projecting when telling you that you can't distinguish said things.

You know absolutely jack **** about my ideology.

You're telling me quite a lot about it, actually.

 

[Belz...]

Will dad be breastfeeding her baby?

Correct pronouns, please.

 

[Belz...]

I don't actually care what's "going on up in that belly of hers"? Why do you?

Are you seriously asking someone why they care about what the real answer is?

And this is a problem for you because... ?

How terrible for you.

Why are you constantly veering away from factual discussion to appeals to emotion?

 

[johnny karate]

Are you seriously asking someone why they care about what the real answer is?

Yeah, because theprestige's interest in this is purely academic. He's looking for "real answers".

Why are you constantly veering away from factual discussion to appeals to emotion?

After defending someone who declared they are being asked to move heaven and earth to cater to transgender people, you accuse me of appeals to emotion?

 

[Wolrab]

I'm surprised it wasn't spun as a male homosexual couple have a natural childbirth of a non gender assigned child.

 

[Belz...]

Yeah, because theprestige's interest in this is purely academic. He's looking for "real answers".

Except it didn't seem to me like you were saying that you didn't believe he wanted the actual answer, but rather that the real answer didn't matter.

After defending someone who declared they are being asked to move heaven and earth to cater to transgender people, you accuse me of appeals to emotion?

Er... yes. Is that supposed to be some sort of hypocrisy?

There's a difference between one (speaking out in frustration, which tends to bring hyperbole) and the other (changing the topic repeatedly).

 

[tyr_13]

Interesting. Asking you to discuss this topic reasonably reminds you why you don't post here often? So you don't like to discuss reasonably?

No, when people who complain about hypocrisy and childishness display such brazen and childish hypocrisy with nary a word from their cohorts, it shows the entire discussion to be bankrupt of critical exploration of a topic and more about advancing a side.

As you were never discussing this honestly, there is no reason for them to continue engaging you. I thank Cavemonster for the attempt, as well as a few others in this thread, but when people cite the dictionary and don't even see it doesn't say what they think it says, there is no room for advancement. Moreover, when people just refuse the context and continue on with their vapid strawmen without even acknowledging the bad arguments others on their 'side' are making, you're doing nothing for them and are just arguing for the lurkers.

Gender is not the same as sex, and this distinction is both useful and factual. Arguing that sex overrides all in all contexts is foolishly ignoring context and nuance. It's the same as saying light always behaves as a particle, or that tomatoes are always a fruit despite knowing that in culinary contexts they're vegetables. Keep the strawman about feelings being everything, the old people locked into their silly gender biases don't have to get it, and it seems more than a few of them are determined to willfully not.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think you are a little confused. The argument is that transgender persons should be able to use the facility that matches the gender they are presenting as. Opponents want them to use their biologically assigned facility, regardless of how they actually appear to themselves or others. There wouldn't be a fuss about it if everyone were on the same side...

This isn't quite accurate. An awful lot of "opponents" would agree with the argument in your first statement above.

Let's take me, for example. I agree that transgender people should use the facility that matches the gender they are presenting as. Now, here's where I part company with many other people. As soon as they present a penis, I say they are presenting as a man. I don't care about their hair or their waistline or their makeup or even their hormonally induced breast-like tissue.

I think you would actually find that a very common opinion of "opponents" as evidenced by so many people's reaction, when someone upthread tried the familiar "I'll show you a picture of someone who looks very feminine or masculine and ask which locker room they ought to use." Everyone who answered said we couldn't know, because we can't see the things that we would see if they were using a locker room.

Indeed, I will go one step farther, and say that even if the people using the locker room can't see the penis, but they know it's there, that person is presenting, to them, as a man. This is what comes up again and again in various school locker room battles, and I'm constantly amazed that grown-ups can't figure out what the problem is. (As the senior girl said at the Palatine, Illinois school board meeting, "Can she put the towel over her eyes?")

So, in that delivery room, the person who inspired this thread was presenting as a woman.

 

[sylvan8798]

This isn't quite accurate. An awful lot of "opponents" would agree with the argument in your first statement above.

Let's take me, for example. I agree that transgender people should use the facility that matches the gender they are presenting as. Now, here's where I part company with many other people. As soon as they present a penis, I say they are presenting as a man. I don't care about their hair or their waistline or their makeup or even their hormonally induced breast-like tissue.

I think you would actually find that a very common opinion of "opponents" as evidenced by so many people's reaction, when someone upthread tried the familiar "I'll show you a picture of someone who looks very feminine or masculine and ask which locker room they ought to use." Everyone who answered said we couldn't know, because we can't see the things that we would see if they were using a locker room.

Indeed, I will go one step farther, and say that even if the people using the locker room can't see the penis, but they know it's there, that person is presenting, to them, as a man. This is what comes up again and again in various school locker room battles, and I'm constantly amazed that grown-ups can't figure out what the problem is. (As the senior girl said at the Palatine, Illinois school board meeting, "Can she put the towel over her eyes?")

So, in that delivery room, the person who inspired this thread was presenting as a woman.

It seems rather disingenuous to suggest that everyone is in agreement about X when you are using different meanings for a key term. How does this resolve anything? You still have an issue with two (or more) sides at an apparent impasse.

Indeed, I will go one step farther, and say that even if the people using the locker room can't see the penis, but they know it's there, that person is presenting, to them, as a man.

Any studies to back this up?

 

[Brainster]

I think you are a little confused. The argument is that transgender persons should be able to use the facility that matches the gender they are presenting as. Opponents want them to use their biologically assigned facility, regardless of how they actually appear to themselves or others. There wouldn't be a fuss about it if everyone were on the same side...

Gosh, do I feel silly! Here I thought quite a few people were saying that a trans woman who has not had the operation should be allowed to use a women's locker room, even though "she" still has the genitals of a male. Glad to see you aren't proposing anything kooky like that.

 

[Meadmaker]

It seems rather disingenuous to suggest that everyone is in agreement about X when you are using different meanings for a key term.

A key term? Like "opponent", as in "Opponents want them", or maybe "presents"? when "presents" isn't really defined? Does "presents" mean "attempts to be seen as", or does it mean "appears to be to most observers"? Or is there some other meaning?

Or are we talking about a key word like "gender", which not everyone uses the same way? Ten years ago, almost no one used it the way we are told is "correct" today, and I'll bet that 25 years ago, literally no one used it the way we are told is correct today.

And then there are the terms "man" and "woman", "boy" and "girl".

But I thought I made it clear in my post that I was describing my opinion, which I explicitly stated was held by an "awful lot of 'opponents'", as opposed to being a universally shared opinion, even among the poorly defined set of "opponents".

I must admit, I referred to "people using the locker room", which could mistakenly be read as "all people using the locker room", instead of "many people using the locker room", which was the intended meaning.

But I think the problem of painting with too broad of a brush in this case occurred primarily when you described what "opponents" wanted, and you did so inaccurately. There are some people who believe that, but it is far from a universally held opinion. My guess is that the largest faction of "opponents" believe as I do, that post op transgenders should use the facility of the adopted gender.

Any studies to back this up?

Hmm....any studies to back up the idea that people perceive anyone with a penis to be a male? Even if they cannot see the penis at any given time?

Well....nothing comes to mind immediately, and I don't have time to do a google scholar literature search, but I do recall from college days that one of the key cognitive developmental milestones identified by Piaget was the point at which children realize that an object that is hidden does not cease to exist. i.e. When you put the cup over the ball, the ball is still there, though it is hidden. I'm sure that the same principle holds for the plural.