Transgender Discussion Thread III: Vote in our poll!

[Auzkhia]

Ideally, there should not be gendered pronouns, some languages have a common 3rd person pronoun, like hän in Finnish, hän means both he and she, English has those, but also the singular they, which is what I use. I also speak German and French, and they have gendered pronouns and a lot of inflected based around masculine, feminine, and in German, neuter grammatical genders. In a language with gendered pronouns, it's important to use the correct ones. I think Mandarin has a same word for both he and she.

ACKCHYUALLY, while he/she are both pronounced as ta, they are written differently, with the male version the symbol for a male and the female version having the symbol for a female. not trying to be a smartass or anything; just thought I'd let you know.

I heard it was both the same, not a student of Chinese mind you, but point is concepts like he and she are only in some languages, and others don't have such explicitly gendered language. English has a sensible neutral option, but French and German, for example need one as well, hopefully those neopronouns will catch on.

[Thuzbekistan]

Good news mates: at the Peabody hotel in memphis where they have changed their restrooms to be gender neutral. Despite signs of men and women being present, it's a good sign that even in memphis tennessee they are making changes.

[Cekoviu]

ACKCHYUALLY, while he/she are both pronounced as ta, they are written differently, with the male version the symbol for a male and the female version having the symbol for a female. not trying to be a smartass or anything; just thought I'd let you know.

I heard it was both the same, not a student of Chinese mind you, but point is concepts like he and she are only in some languages, and others don't have such explicitly gendered language. English has a sensible neutral option, but French and German, for example need one as well, hopefully those neopronouns will catch on.

Icelandic is one of the worse languages in this regard, having different greetings and whatnot for whether you're talking to a man or a woman, and last names containing the sex you were assigned (until changed). At least it's not that bad.

[Neutraligon]

ACKCHYUALLY, while he/she are both pronounced as ta, they are written differently, with the male version the symbol for a male and the female version having the symbol for a female. not trying to be a smartass or anything; just thought I'd let you know.

I heard it was both the same, not a student of Chinese mind you, but point is concepts like he and she are only in some languages, and others don't have such explicitly gendered language. English has a sensible neutral option, but French and German, for example need one as well, hopefully those neopronouns will catch on.

Misthas is correct the pronunciation is the same, but the radical used depends on if you are talking to a man or woman. Although...from what I understand the one that is used for women is explicitly about women, while the one that tends to be used with men is also more gender neutral and is what is used when the gender of the person is unknown.

[Auzkhia]

I heard it was both the same, not a student of Chinese mind you, but point is concepts like he and she are only in some languages, and others don't have such explicitly gendered language. English has a sensible neutral option, but French and German, for example need one as well, hopefully those neopronouns will catch on.

Icelandic is one of the worse languages in this regard, having different greetings and whatnot for whether you're talking to a man or a woman, and last names containing the sex you were assigned (until changed). At least it's not that bad.

In French plural forms of he or she are used for they, which are ils/elles, but in German, they = sie, but sie can mean she (Sie = you; German is case sensetive), because for some reason the feminine and plural have similar inflections. But yeah I'd imagine Icelandic would be like that, every last name is just the father's name with either -son or -dóttir attached to it, it's not a family name like most cultures do, Russian has names like those too, but are middle names, not last names. Though what if an Icelandic child doesn't know their father at all and only the mother, would they take the mother's name?

[Cekoviu]

Icelandic is one of the worse languages in this regard, having different greetings and whatnot for whether you're talking to a man or a woman, and last names containing the sex you were assigned (until changed). At least it's not that bad.

In French plural forms of he or she are used for they, which are ils/elles, but in German, they = sie, but sie can mean she (Sie = you; German is case sensetive), because for some reason the feminine and plural have similar inflections. But yeah I'd imagine Icelandic would be like that, every last name is just the father's name with either -son or -dóttir attached to it, it's not a family name like most cultures do, Russian has names like those too, but are middle names, not last names. Though what if an Icelandic child doesn't know their father at all and only the mother, would they take the mother's name?

That's a good question. Probably that, or maybe their grandfather's.

[Ifreann]

Icelandic is one of the worse languages in this regard, having different greetings and whatnot for whether you're talking to a man or a woman, and last names containing the sex you were assigned (until changed). At least it's not that bad.

In French plural forms of he or she are used for they, which are ils/elles, but in German, they = sie, but sie can mean she (Sie = you; German is case sensetive), because for some reason the feminine and plural have similar inflections. But yeah I'd imagine Icelandic would be like that, every last name is just the father's name with either -son or -dóttir attached to it, it's not a family name like most cultures do, Russian has names like those too, but are middle names, not last names. Though what if an Icelandic child doesn't know their father at all and only the mother, would they take the mother's name?

People in Iceland do take their mother's name for various reasons, so yes. And some families in Iceland have adopted family names.

[Philjia]

Trump is gunning for trans people.

Bastard.

[Ausinia]

Trump is gunning for trans people.

Bastard.

For all conservatives ‘family values’ being a family is inclusive, how in hell and heaven is this inclusive? My god, he’s got his cock out in every policy he makes

[Auzkhia]

Trump is gunning for trans people.

Bastard.

I remember some people saying he'd be the "most LGBT friendly republican president", it seems like what republicans say turn out to be the exact opposite, and they were insultingly wrong. I'm trans and sick of being treated like some sort of social issue, my existence is not a matter of debate and policy. Equal rights now and full recognition of trans and non binary identities. How can I be a citizen if the government doesn't recognize one part of myself as a thing? It's upsetting and a lot of my friends are angry, scared, and ready to take action. The current administration is openly hostile against the LGBTQ community, I voted, but that's never enough, sue him, make a stink, call everyone in the US congress.

Trans rights have been finally taking the front row seat after same sex marriage became legally recognized nationwide in 2015, so this is a reminder that Republican politicians don't care, even hate trans people. They're not just sticking it to the gays, or Mexicans, or muslims, but everyone who isn't a straight white Christian man.

[Des-Bal]

Trump is gunning for trans people.

Bastard.

The article overstates the proposal, it doesn't sound like anyone's saying transgender people don't exist. It would be better with the actual memo but it looks like what's being pushed for is for title IX to focus exclusively on biological sex and not gender.

My knowledge on the subject is spotty but I'm pretty sure title IX only applied to gender identity for a few months in 2016. The Obama administration issued a memo saying it did, a few judges ruled favorably, and then a nationwide injunction came down suspending enforcement all within a few months. Trump stopped fighting the injunction after he took office.

Supposing it goes through I can't imagine much changing.

[Vassenor]

Trump is gunning for trans people.

Bastard.

I remember some people saying he'd be the "most LGBT friendly republican president", it seems like what republicans say turn out to be the exact opposite, and they were insultingly wrong. I'm trans and sick of being treated like some sort of social issue, my existence is not a matter of debate and policy. Equal rights now and full recognition of trans and non binary identities. How can I be a citizen if the government doesn't recognize one part of myself as a thing? It's upsetting and a lot of my friends are angry, scared, and ready to take action. The current administration is openly hostile against the LGBTQ community, I voted, but that's never enough, sue him, make a stink, call everyone in the US congress.

Trans rights have been finally taking the front row seat after same sex marriage became legally recognized nationwide in 2015, so this is a reminder that Republican politicians don't care, even hate trans people. They're not just sticking it to the gays, or Mexicans, or muslims, but everyone who isn't a straight white Christian man.

But he held a flag once so he could never do something like this!

[Dumb Ideologies]

Trump is gunning for trans people.

Bastard.

The article overstates the proposal, it doesn't sound like anyone's saying transgender people don't exist. It would be better with the actual memo but it looks like what's being pushed for is for title IX to focus exclusively on biological sex and not gender.

My knowledge on the subject is spotty but I'm pretty sure title IX only applied to gender identity for a few months in 2016. The Obama administration issued a memo saying it did, a few judges ruled favorably, and then a nationwide injunction came down suspending enforcement all within a few months. Trump stopped fighting the injunction after he took office.

Supposing it goes through I can't imagine much changing.

I think you're probably nearer the mark than the article. Alarmist articles about individual policy changes miss the point and probably contribute to the narrative of us as hysteric SJW types. What's more significant is the direction of travel of policy and how that could open the way for future changes than it is for the magnitude of the change itself, which as you say is only reverting something implemented briefly in 2016. But more thoughtful pieces like that wouldn't get views, symptomatic of the industry's problems across the spectum right from tabloidism up to the click-seeking social media age. Long-term trends are less interesting than making the thing that's just happened into the thing that changes everything.

I don't think Trump even particularly dislikes trans people personally. It's just a very easy way to get enthusiasm from social conservatives when there's an election coming up or he's done something that makes them a bit uncomfortable. It's more of a rollback of legal position by a thousand opportunist cuts as he keeps going and opponents of "transgenderism" are emboldened by the cumulative change of direction and pursue nore hostile policies and language locally, working towards his stated agenda.

Trump's a deal-maker trying to keep an unstable coalition of supporters together, and downgrades to trans people's social position are just one of his bargaining chips to be utilised whenever it's most useful. Some of the chips understandably take it personally after a bit.

[Dreshand]

Ahem,
This is going to sound really weird. But how does one describe what a trans person is to someone who has never heard of it before. The best I can do is vague images and noises. Please help

[The New California Republic]

Ahem,
This is going to sound really weird. But how does one describe what a trans person is to someone who has never heard of it before. The best I can do is vague images and noises. Please help

Transgender people have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their assigned sex.

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

[Dreshand]

Ahem,
This is going to sound really weird. But how does one describe what a trans person is to someone who has never heard of it before. The best I can do is vague images and noises. Please help

Transgender people have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their assigned sex.

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

I was hoping for a much simpler way

[The V O I D]

Ahem,
This is going to sound really weird. But how does one describe what a trans person is to someone who has never heard of it before. The best I can do is vague images and noises. Please help

A person whose biological sex does not match their neural makeup (source).

Essentially, transwomen will have neurological structures somewhat similar to ciswomen. Transmen will have the same, being neurologically similar to cismales.

(Not exactly sure how valid the source is, but it makes some amount of sense. As for the cause, your guess is as good as mine.)

[The New California Republic]

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

I was hoping for a much simpler way

I'm...not sure that it is going to get much simpler than that while preserving the meaning. Any simpler and we will be resorting to sock puppets...

[Dumb Ideologies]

I was hoping for a much simpler way

I'm...not sure that it is going to get much simpler than that while preserving the meaning. Any simpler and we will be resorting to sock puppets...

The sock to glove transition is the most degenerate of all!

[Dreshand]

I'm...not sure that it is going to get much simpler than that while preserving the meaning. Any simpler and we will be resorting to sock puppets...

The sock to glove transition is the most degenerate of all!

XD
and I meant in the terms of the Wikipedia article.
I didn't see the other quote because I thought that was just someone else asking a similar q

[Page]

Ahem,
This is going to sound really weird. But how does one describe what a trans person is to someone who has never heard of it before. The best I can do is vague images and noises. Please help

Start with the acronyms MTF and FTM (male to female/female to male). This is how you indicate the sex one was identified with from birth and the person's gender identity. When an MTF person is born, their parents see a boy, in most cases give a male name, and raise their kid as a boy. This is the M. Then, later in life this person discovers that she identifies as a woman. She will often decide to choose a new name and want to be referred to by female pronouns.

From that point, it's polite to use the name and pronouns that she wants you to use. Many transgender people will eventually seek sex reassignment surgery, but not all. Most will eventually start dressing in accordance with their gender identity and taking hormones. An MTF person will take estrogen, which will alter her secondary sex characteristics. Her skin will soften, her body fat will be redistributed, she will develop breasts. An FTM person takes testosterone, causing his voice pitch to lower, body fat to be redistributed, and allowing the growth of facial hair.

However, neither sex reassignment nor hormone therapy are prerequisites for someone's gender identity to be recognized, they should be recognized as the gender they identify with as soon as they ask you to. There are many reasons why one might be unable to take hormones or have surgery. Health concerns, lack of money, laws that mandate living as one's gender identity for a certain time before being eligible, or it may not be safe for them to reveal their gender identity to certain people. Regardless, their gender identity is valid. There is no surgical procedure or hormone that changes someone from one gender to another. These things are done so a trans person feels more comfortable with their body, but their gender identity has been there all along.

[The New California Republic]

I'm...not sure that it is going to get much simpler than that while preserving the meaning. Any simpler and we will be resorting to sock puppets...

The sock to glove transition is the most degenerate of all!

If a sock identifies as a glove then it should be allowed to change its manufacturing label to reflect that.

[Dreshand]

The sock to glove transition is the most degenerate of all!

If a sock identifies as a glove then it should be allowed to change its manufacturing label to reflect that.

I'm going to post this with no context in every chat I know

[Des-Bal]

I think you're probably nearer the mark than the article. Alarmist articles about individual policy changes miss the point and probably contribute to the narrative of us as hysteric SJW types. What's more significant is the direction of travel of policy and how that could open the way for future changes than it is for the magnitude of the change itself, which as you say is only reverting something implemented briefly in 2016. But more thoughtful pieces like that wouldn't get views, symptomatic of the industry's problems across the spectum right from tabloidism up to the click-seeking social media age. Long-term trends are less interesting than making the thing that's just happened into the thing that changes everything.

I don't think Trump even particularly dislikes trans people personally. It's just a very easy way to get enthusiasm from social conservatives when there's an election coming up or he's done something that makes them a bit uncomfortable. It's more of a rollback of legal position by a thousand opportunist cuts as he keeps going and opponents of "transgenderism" are emboldened by the cumulative change of direction and pursue nore hostile policies and language locally, working towards his stated agenda.

Trump's a deal-maker trying to keep an unstable coalition of supporters together, and downgrades to trans people's social position are just one of his bargaining chips to be utilised whenever it's most useful. Some of the chips understandably take it personally after a bit.

I think that's certainly a valid perspective. I cringe when I see a legitimate transgender issue presented as with the energy of apocalyptic doomsaying. Yelling about erasure and the emotional violence of microaggressions might mobilize the converted but it's just not rhetoric that builds understanding or rational discourse.

To your second point I agree wholeheartedly. Educated, wealthy, upper class people aren't afraid of immigrants stealing their jobs, same sex marriages ruining their families, or Transgender people peeing where they please in public schools. This is, was, and shall continue to be about fundraising and having something to offer the average conservative voter from a platform that mostly involves fellating corporate interests at the expense of working people.

[Auzkhia]

The article overstates the proposal, it doesn't sound like anyone's saying transgender people don't exist. It would be better with the actual memo but it looks like what's being pushed for is for title IX to focus exclusively on biological sex and not gender.

My knowledge on the subject is spotty but I'm pretty sure title IX only applied to gender identity for a few months in 2016. The Obama administration issued a memo saying it did, a few judges ruled favorably, and then a nationwide injunction came down suspending enforcement all within a few months. Trump stopped fighting the injunction after he took office.

Supposing it goes through I can't imagine much changing.

I think you're probably nearer the mark than the article. Alarmist articles about individual policy changes miss the point and probably contribute to the narrative of us as hysteric SJW types. What's more significant is the direction of travel of policy and how that could open the way for future changes than it is for the magnitude of the change itself, which as you say is only reverting something implemented briefly in 2016. But more thoughtful pieces like that wouldn't get views, symptomatic of the industry's problems across the spectum right from tabloidism up to the click-seeking social media age. Long-term trends are less interesting than making the thing that's just happened into the thing that changes everything.

I don't think Trump even particularly dislikes trans people personally. It's just a very easy way to get enthusiasm from social conservatives when there's an election coming up or he's done something that makes them a bit uncomfortable. It's more of a rollback of legal position by a thousand opportunist cuts as he keeps going and opponents of "transgenderism" are emboldened by the cumulative change of direction and pursue nore hostile policies and language locally, working towards his stated agenda.

Trump's a deal-maker trying to keep an unstable coalition of supporters together, and downgrades to trans people's social position are just one of his bargaining chips to be utilised whenever it's most useful. Some of the chips understandably take it personally after a bit.

I think Donald Trump and American conservatives just do not care about trans and queer people, in my experience at least, from encountering conservatives irl. They only care about bettering themselves financially, not seeing too many minorities, and having lower taxes. Sure there are outspoken bigots, despite being the loud minority they sure have a lot of weight in policy making. Even if it is a political move to rile up evangelicals and social conservatives, it's something that harms a community that he claimed to care about more than Hillary Clinton. But then again, it's not like Trump was ever a man of his word he has enabled and emboldened fascism in the United States, his actions have been more clear than his words.

I just hope allies will help, like I said transgender rights have become more prominent in discourse, I remember when same sex marriage was the #1 goal of the LGBT movement, or so it seemed, it pivoted to anti-discrimination in 2015 after the matter seemed to be settled.