Politics and Society Moderation Discussion Only Fans Thread

I tried that once here referring to a trans /former trans person who preferred "he" at the time as "she" and people jumped all over me for it.

Turns out I was right and she's a she again.

Those were almost like complete thoughts. I am glad that you are progressing!!!

We don't mean to cloud the mod thread but for now I think its expected smoke etc...

Its my understanding and opinion, that its most normal and appropriate for a transgender person without the affliction of gender dysphoria to treat misgendering as if like the wind passing by. And that is the same way each of us generally would. Obviously harassment is different by not gender topic specific.

We would expect this to be different with someone with gender dysphoria. They have issues with this kind of thing no doubt.

We don't want to bend our belief of nature to the latter right? We want to accomodate people with mental illness etc. but none of us mean to bend reality to others illnesses right?

Mentally healthy transgender people and those with gender dysphoria share the same gender incongruence feelings. In one case, they have been able to handle the discrimination and denigrating comments that almost all transgender people experience. Maybe they havent experienced that much yet. Another may have become debilitated by the extent of negativity directed at them, to the point that they are diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

Is your position then that it's OK to use the opposite pronoun then the one the person uses just because they aren't excessively depressed yet? If you are a school teacher who insists on using male pronouns irt a new student who is a trans woman, who all the other students only know, say as Lisa, thereby outing her as a transgender person and thereby exposing her to all the bigotry and harassment some students will direct at her, its OK just so you can feel smug in your beliefs?

Then due to you outing that student and the discrimination that follows you have essentially driven her to the extreme depression indicative of gender dysphoria. To say it's OK to misgender trans people without gender dysphoria can actually contribute to them becoming mentally ill.

It strikes me as odd that some people act as if they would be "selling their soul" simply by showing someone the courtesy of using the same pronouns the person does.

In a way, it sort of reminds me of the people who refused to call Cassius Clay by Mohammed Ali when he changed his name. It was "I dont give a **** what he calls himself, he's Cassius Clay". Yet those same people had no problem calling movie stars by their stage names, like Rock Hudson or Cary Grant.

OK. Im not going to move or delete the posts, but please let's get back on track with mod stuff itt. I understand thine fascination with grammar, but thou would be best served by going to the general discussion thread where thy all can share thine ideas.

This is a bit of an aside, but I don't think gender dysphoria is the only reason "non healthy" or "mentally ill" people transition. (Typing that out really hammers in chillrob's point imo, there is definitely a disconnect between what I'm trying to get across and the available word choice to describe non healthy reasons someone might transition.)

this feels reasonable

The DSM definition of Gender Dysphoria given by Brian doesn't mention anything necessarily resulting from discrimination or harassment. It doesn't have to come from any external stimulus (I believe only one of the possible qualifiers mentioned anything external).

. No, it doesnt have to, put often is a major factor. For example if you were constantly the target of jokes and insults at work (like someone telling you you arent a real woman and calling you he all the time) that those types of things dont contribute to someone getting depressed or debilitated, say to the point where they just cant go to work anymore? Or maybe you lose your job, so get into financial troubles. Finally situation seems hopeless and its all tied to your transgender status.

It definitely is also the result of the incongruence itself. But outside interactions can play a major role as well.

Actually those seem similar to me.

Someone meets a trans woman. Everyone is interacting with her as a woman. Then someone discovers she is transgender and being an *******, cant wait for the opportunity to announce to every that "she is really a he" and continues to do so.

With Mohommad Ali, some people, as you state, used calling him by his old name simply to try and be hurtful and delegitimize his name change and new religion. So in both cases the refusal to refer to the person as they publicly present themselves is most often a deliberate attempt to show disapproval rather than adhering to some higher value. They are just being jerks.

I don't think they're always being jerks. And I think Ali deserved some disrespect for his sudden conscientious objector position, claiming to be anti-violence while beating people up for a living.

lol, there’s nothing inconsistent about being anti-war and engaging in contact sports.

That's like criticisng someone for enjoying sex while being anti-rape

Conscientious objector status is based upon a moral or religious objection to war, not violence. And do you really believe that a person who participates in a violent sport is somehow disqualified from objecting to war?

All the dreaded "u"s

It's not far from the truth. Trans women don't have a womb or ova nor can their breasts produce milk, nor can they experience childbirth or a menstrual cycle and all the hormonal feelings that go with it. Nor have they pre transition experienced the same discrimination biological women have historically faced. Nor have they experienced the same things women have in society.
Trans women/men aren't women/men certainly not just because they say they are who they are. They have a gender dysphoria and also have my sympathies and compassion, but that certainly doesn't make them indistinguishable from actual biological real men or women and it's downright Orwellian to state otherwise, never mind ridiculous. If I tell you I'm really a black person despite the fact that I'm white, that doesn't mean I'm indistinguishable from a black person just because I tell you that's who I am as that's who I identify as, surely you can see this?
So no it's not far from the truth and is in fact the actual truth. Nor is the gay comparison apt, as gays never expected to be seen the same as and indistinguishable from their opposite sex.

I just want clarification on whether the mods regard this as acceptable or if such truths are forbidden. If it's the latter then this forum will decline in no time and will eventually cease to exist. You can't have an up is down, black is white and all because people simply say so and feel that way paradigm. We're already seeing examples of this, with Uke's refusal to discuss the eunuch issue. And it won't work for this forum.

I need clarification on my question from the likes of mods such as Browser, who has decreed the new guidelines. Again if it's the latter I simply won't discuss the issue and post on other threads instead. I would also like clarification on whether these guidelines apply to all demographics, such as Jewish posters who have been subjected to constant anti Semitism on another thread, or just trans people?

So again clarification would be appreciated, so I'll know what threads I can and can't post on, thanks.

Wow. Harsh. But fair.

I think it's very hypocritical. Especially when the religion claims to not be violent, and it was spread by war. I said "anti-violence", not "anti-war".

Regardless, most of those drafted to serve in Vietnam were anti-war. They didn't all change their name and religion in an attempt to evade the draft. There are very few people who have ever claimed to be "pro-war".

I've already stated in the past my disrespect for participants in violent sports, and for Muhammed Ali in particular. He was an embarrassment to the country, and particularly to my home town, IMO.

Lol, I'm not quite that old. But I did go to a school run by a ridiculously backwards religion (which shouldn't be allowed to exist, IMO), so they probably were behind the times.

I certainly don't wish to see bigotry against anyone but I'm not dumbing myself down either due to essentially an argumentum ad populum. So again I just want to know what the story is on this specific issue so again, I'll know where to post.

I think browser is now discovering the Streisand effect. A bunch of people who didn't give a **** about any of those threads, including me, all of a sudden now have an opinion.

He may have to learn not to pay attention to those who don't actually give a **** about the issue but like to complain.

It's not entertainment.

You got clarification. Trans are not defined as mentally ill by x authority and 2p2 upholds it in this sub. what you are asking about isn't a question for a mod its content to be debated because its allowed.

I beg to differ.