Transgender Discussion Thread III: Vote in our poll!

[Geneviev]

So as I was watching episodes of America's Got Talent that I missed, I saw a trans guy who's a good singer (Brody Ray I think his name was). That was cool.

But why is it never trans girls? It's like people like me still don't exist.

[The V O I D]

So as I was watching episodes of America's Got Talent that I missed, I saw a trans guy who's a good singer (Brody Ray I think his name was). That was cool.

But why is it never trans girls? It's like people like me still don't exist.

There was a transwoman on the show a year or two ago, as a comedian. IIRC, anyway.

[Khasinkonia]

So as I was watching episodes of America's Got Talent that I missed, I saw a trans guy who's a good singer (Brody Ray I think his name was). That was cool.

But why is it never trans girls? It's like people like me still don't exist.

Thailand’s Got Talent had a great bit. Trans woman used both female and boymode voices.

[Geneviev]

So as I was watching episodes of America's Got Talent that I missed, I saw a trans guy who's a good singer (Brody Ray I think his name was). That was cool.

But why is it never trans girls? It's like people like me still don't exist.

There was a transwoman on the show a year or two ago, as a comedian. IIRC, anyway.

I looked it up. Julia Scotti. She's a good comedian, actually. And also yay, trans women exist. Cool.

[New Greater Netherlands]

Trans folks sure do seem concerned about how other people speak.

Cis folks sure do seem concerned about how other people live their lives.

Don't know the official reason people don't like it as I'm not actively involved (surprise, surprise!) in any activist groups. But to me it's a word that doesn't work very well because it makes it sound almost as if being transgender is something that was done to them? "Oh no, I've been transgendered!!!" Feels like it plays into the semantic web of transphobic implications about it not being "natural" and people being tricked into it by some evil conspiracy of doctors or psychiatrists like the phobefems and religionists argue. It doesn't upset me personally, but I've always thought it sounds awkward.

That's actually the general consensus.

So i am actually then a woman? (Ofc i am a woman but i hope you get it)

I feel like I'm missing some context here.

Well, Geneviev said Transgender shouldn't be a noun, thus i asked her if i am actually a woman, but ofc i am but i would describe myself currently as a transwoman and a woman. Or I misunderstood it

[Jelmatt]

Cis folks sure do seem concerned about how other people live their lives.



That's actually the general consensus.



I feel like I'm missing some context here.

Well, Geneviev said Transgender shouldn't be a noun, thus i asked her if i am actually a woman, but ofc i am but i would describe myself currently as a transwoman and a woman. Or I misunderstood it

You're a transgender woman (note how it's an adjective), and a woman, but you're not "a transgender," is what I think she was trying to say.

[Khasinkonia]

Well, Geneviev said Transgender shouldn't be a noun, thus i asked her if i am actually a woman, but ofc i am but i would describe myself currently as a transwoman and a woman. Or I misunderstood it

You're a transgender woman (note how it's an adjective), and a woman, but you're not "a transgender," is what I think she was trying to say.

Different style imo. I prefer how transwoman looks because I’m a slut for agglutination but I know lots of folks look at the word as a solid object rather than a noun with an adjective attached.

[Luna Amore]

Huh. TIL.

I think it's probably because male, female and gender are all nouns that you can naturally follow that to using transgender as a noun. Etymologically it makes sense in my head and I don't understand why it's offensive, but TIL none-the-less.

Don't know the official reason people don't like it as I'm not actively involved (surprise, surprise!) in any activist groups. But to me it's a word that doesn't work very well because it makes it sound almost as if being transgender is something that was done to them? "Oh no, I've been transgendered!!!" Feels like it plays into the semantic web of transphobic implications about it not being "natural" and people being tricked into it by some evil conspiracy of doctors or psychiatrists like the phobefems and religionists argue. It doesn't upset me personally, but I've always thought it sounds awkward.

When terms go from widely accepted in the community to on the outs and offensive within a decade, I would think there'd be more of a solid reasoning then what reads as vague feelings about the sound and hypothetical implications. Those terms don't inherently have offense in them, right? They were accepted in the community in recent memory. And transgendered just follows the same pattern as gendered. Maybe some would prefer one term over another but preference doesn't mean non-preferential words are now defacto offensive. It just seems counter-intuitive to a community moving toward acceptance.

I mean, cisgender as a word sounds pretty terrible. It honestly brings up images of a snake in my mind. Etymologically, it makes sense though. But is it reasonable for me to not want to be called it just because of how it sounds? Is that a reasonable offense to have and to expect other people to care about, or is it far more sensible for me to realize that there is nothing inherently offensive with how that term came about or what it means and it's really just my personal issue with the sound? That it's more likely that people who use it aren't trying to disparage me or offend me, they are just using the vocabulary they know to relate to me.

Even from an individual standpoint this is a weird tack to take. It implies a group identity rather than treating transgender people as individuals with individual peeves and offenses. E.g. 'This is what you should avoid saying when referring or talking to us'. vs 'I don't care if you call me a transgender. It's not all that important.'

The more hurdles there are between you and someone you want to understand you and who you are, the less likely that common ground is going to be reached. No one has to put in the effort to try and understand your life. This is true of every person on the planet. I would think since more acceptance and understanding is one of the end goals, the less hurdles the better, no? Obviously, you aren't going to win over everyone to understanding because no one does and really who would try? But to illustrate the conflict: I actually stopped, saved this post, and hesitated before submitting it. When there's a list of 'don'ts' involved that don't seem to have a clear-cut reason to be there, the chance of pissing off someone seems inevitabile. Why invite the grief?

I think you missed the point of saying that. It wasn't to make a factual claim. It was to point out the stupidity of Oudland's statement, by making a similarly-stupid one.

Which part of the statement did you have an issue with? Because after reading through GLAAD's Transgender Media Reference Guide, there's a pretty long list of "Don't say this, avoid this, don't say that" ranging from 'well, obviously that's offensive' to 'why are you nit-picking that much?' And as said, a good portion goes against what it would have said not that long ago. If there's going to be a guide to follow, it's not unreasonable that some people could be a bit overwhelmed by the seemingly unnecessary nuance and size of it. Sure, that's a media guide, but from the sounds of this conversation, it might as well be a guide for the general populace. Most subsets of people don't come with a media guide of what not to say. Is it really that surprising that some people are going to balk at being given a list of what to avoid, what not to say and how to phrase their speech?

[The Parkus Empire]

Huh. TIL.

I think it's probably because male, female and gender are all nouns that you can naturally follow that to using transgender as a noun. Etymologically it makes sense in my head and I don't understand why it's offensive, but TIL none-the-less.

Don't know the official reason people don't like it as I'm not actively involved (surprise, surprise!) in any activist groups. But to me it's a word that doesn't work very well because it makes it sound almost as if being transgender is something that was done to them? "Oh no, I've been transgendered!!!" Feels like it plays into the semantic web of transphobic implications about it not being "natural" and people being tricked into it by some evil conspiracy of doctors or psychiatrists like the phobefems and religionists argue. It doesn't upset me personally, but I've always thought it sounds awkward.

It makes me think of a DeLorean that goes into different genders. "You discovered the flux capacitor, which is what makes transgender possible."

[The Serbian Empire]

Don't know the official reason people don't like it as I'm not actively involved (surprise, surprise!) in any activist groups. But to me it's a word that doesn't work very well because it makes it sound almost as if being transgender is something that was done to them? "Oh no, I've been transgendered!!!" Feels like it plays into the semantic web of transphobic implications about it not being "natural" and people being tricked into it by some evil conspiracy of doctors or psychiatrists like the phobefems and religionists argue. It doesn't upset me personally, but I've always thought it sounds awkward.

When terms go from widely accepted in the community to on the outs and offensive within a decade, I would think there'd be more of a solid reasoning then what reads as vague feelings about the sound and hypothetical implications. Those terms don't inherently have offense in them, right? They were accepted in the community in recent memory. And transgendered just follows the same pattern as gendered. Maybe some would prefer one term over another but preference doesn't mean non-preferential words are now defacto offensive. It just seems counter-intuitive to a community moving toward acceptance.

I mean, cisgender as a word sounds pretty terrible. It honestly brings up images of a snake in my mind. Etymologically, it makes sense though. But is it reasonable for me to not want to be called it just because of how it sounds? Is that a reasonable offense to have and to expect other people to care about, or is it far more sensible for me to realize that there is nothing inherently offensive with how that term came about or what it means and it's really just my personal issue with the sound? That it's more likely that people who use it aren't trying to disparage me or offend me, they are just using the vocabulary they know to relate to me.

Even from an individual standpoint this is a weird tack to take. It implies a group identity rather than treating transgender people as individuals with individual peeves and offenses. E.g. 'This is what you should avoid saying when referring or talking to us'. vs 'I don't care if you call me a transgender. It's not all that important.'

The more hurdles there are between you and someone you want to understand you and who you are, the less likely that common ground is going to be reached. No one has to put in the effort to try and understand your life. This is true of every person on the planet. I would think since more acceptance and understanding is one of the end goals, the less hurdles the better, no? Obviously, you aren't going to win over everyone to understanding because no one does and really who would try? But to illustrate the conflict: I actually stopped, saved this post, and hesitated before submitting it. When there's a list of 'don'ts' involved that don't seem to have a clear-cut reason to be there, the chance of pissing off someone seems inevitabile. Why invite the grief?

I think you missed the point of saying that. It wasn't to make a factual claim. It was to point out the stupidity of Oudland's statement, by making a similarly-stupid one.

Which part of the statement did you have an issue with? Because after reading through GLAAD's Transgender Media Reference Guide, there's a pretty long list of "Don't say this, avoid this, don't say that" ranging from 'well, obviously that's offensive' to 'why are you nit-picking that much?' And as said, a good portion goes against what it would have said not that long ago. If there's going to be a guide to follow, it's not unreasonable that some people could be a bit overwhelmed by the seemingly unnecessary nuance and size of it. Sure, that's a media guide, but from the sounds of this conversation, it might as well be a guide for the general populace. Most subsets of people don't come with a media guide of what not to say. Is it really that surprising that some people are going to balk at being given a list of what to avoid, what not to say and how to phrase their speech?

I'll say it this way, dysphoria is a minefield. You don't want to step on a landmine.

[The Blaatschapen]

Don't know the official reason people don't like it as I'm not actively involved (surprise, surprise!) in any activist groups. But to me it's a word that doesn't work very well because it makes it sound almost as if being transgender is something that was done to them? "Oh no, I've been transgendered!!!" Feels like it plays into the semantic web of transphobic implications about it not being "natural" and people being tricked into it by some evil conspiracy of doctors or psychiatrists like the phobefems and religionists argue. It doesn't upset me personally, but I've always thought it sounds awkward.

It makes me think of a DeLorean that goes into different genders. "You discovered the flux capacitor, which is what makes transgender possible."

I see a remake where a transgender young woman travels back in time and has her lesbian mother fall in love with her.

[Jelmatt]

You're a transgender woman (note how it's an adjective), and a woman, but you're not "a transgender," is what I think she was trying to say.

Different style imo. I prefer how transwoman looks because I’m a slut for agglutination but I know lots of folks look at the word as a solid object rather than a noun with an adjective attached.

I have no objections to "transwoman," honestly, that's an entirely orthographic difference, but the point remains that Geneviev wasn't objecting to the use of "trans woman/transwoman" but in saying "transgender" as a synonym for "transness" or "gender variance" or "transgenderism," and presumably also to saying a trans person is "a transgender."

[Grenartia]

I think you missed the point of saying that. It wasn't to make a factual claim. It was to point out the stupidity of Oudland's statement, by making a similarly-stupid one.

Which part of the statement did you have an issue with? Because after reading through GLAAD's Transgender Media Reference Guide, there's a pretty long list of "Don't say this, avoid this, don't say that" ranging from 'well, obviously that's offensive' to 'why are you nit-picking that much?' And as said, a good portion goes against what it would have said not that long ago. If there's going to be a guide to follow, it's not unreasonable that some people could be a bit overwhelmed by the seemingly unnecessary nuance and size of it. Sure, that's a media guide, but from the sounds of this conversation, it might as well be a guide for the general populace. Most subsets of people don't come with a media guide of what not to say. Is it really that surprising that some people are going to balk at being given a list of what to avoid, what not to say and how to phrase their speech?

And I could equally easily make the case that cis people don't want us using the bathroom in public, doing anything that requires identification, or even existing at all, based on the number of bills aimed at stopping us from using the safest and most appropriate bathrooms for us, requiring schools and therapists to out us to family members that could ship us off to torture camps, the continued existence of said torture camps, the disproportionate murder rate against us (and hate crimes against us in general, along with the criminal justice system's lax attitude in finding the perpetrators and adequately punishing them), the rampant employment discrimination, the unnecessary and overly complicated legal hoops we need to jump through to get the proper identification (and that's not even pointing out the jurisdictions that don't allow us to get the proper identification in the first place), the healthcare discrimination, the housing discrimination, the near-constant use of slurs and derogatory language towards us by many people, the constant debate surrounding our entire existence, and the callousness of society at large when these facts are pointed out (including the inevitable "whiny snowflakes" shitfests, and the appeal to other problems line).

Sure, that's not all cis people, and not even most, but is it really surprising that we're tired of the bullshit?

You want me to acknowledge how one media guide makes cis people feel like we're policing their language. But would you even acknowledge how all of what I just listed makes trans people feel like cis people are policing our very existence?

[Khasinkonia]

Different style imo. I prefer how transwoman looks because I’m a slut for agglutination but I know lots of folks look at the word as a solid object rather than a noun with an adjective attached.

I have no objections to "transwoman," honestly, that's an entirely orthographic difference, but the point remains that Geneviev wasn't objecting to the use of "trans woman/transwoman" but in saying "transgender" as a synonym for "transness" or "gender variance" or "transgenderism," and presumably also to saying a trans person is "a transgender."

Some level of me really doesn’t care if I’m referred to as an “annoying tranny” or some shit like that by the government as long as I get coverage and the stuff I need tbh. Like just gimme my titty skittles and spirits already and be on with it.

[Jelmatt]

I have no objections to "transwoman," honestly, that's an entirely orthographic difference, but the point remains that Geneviev wasn't objecting to the use of "trans woman/transwoman" but in saying "transgender" as a synonym for "transness" or "gender variance" or "transgenderism," and presumably also to saying a trans person is "a transgender."

Some level of me really doesn’t care if I’m referred to as an “annoying tranny” or some shit like that by the government as long as I get coverage and the stuff I need tbh. Like just gimme my titty skittles and spirits already and be on with it.

Honestly, that's probably a really good attitude to take, but not everyone is mentally... prepared? For that, I suppose.

[Khasinkonia]

Some level of me really doesn’t care if I’m referred to as an “annoying tranny” or some shit like that by the government as long as I get coverage and the stuff I need tbh. Like just gimme my titty skittles and spirits already and be on with it.

Honestly, that's probably a really good attitude to take, but not everyone is mentally... prepared? For that, I suppose.

I get it, yeah. Honestly I’d be willing to make the trade with those difficult folks of calling me what ever they want in exchange for my logistical needs met, but I get that a lot of folks are more delicate with the matter. That being said, I think on some level it’s because “transness” isn’t something I ascribe much value to in myself in of itself, so it’s extremely likely that, by the time I’ve had SRS and all the paperwork done, I’ll just kinda put it on the back burner. That being said, the idea of one day becoming a trans matriarch is kinda appealing

[Val Halla]

Should hear about my next GIC appointment soon

[The New California Republic]

Should hear about my next GIC appointment soon

GIC? What's that.

Oh and also, so called "conversion therapy" to be banned in the UK soon: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44686374

[Vassenor]

Should hear about my next GIC appointment soon

GIC? What's that.

Oh and also, so called "conversion therapy" to be banned in the UK soon: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44686374

GICs are the specialist NHS clinics that handle trans* patients.

[Jong Un]

THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS...

[Khasinkonia]

THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS...

Please, feel free to go beyond the vast majority of those who spew this five word sentence, and explain yourself coherently.

[The New California Republic]

THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS...

Nah, there aren't. Also, SHOUTING doesn't somehow make your quip any more valid...

[Dumb Ideologies]

THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS...

Oh goody. Another one from the "only two genders and only one volume" brigade.

[Khasinkonia]

THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS...

Nah, there aren't. Also, SHOUTING doesn't somehow make your quip any more valid...

Would quip really be the right word here? A quip is defined as a witty remark, which breaks essentially to a comment showing or characterised by quick and inventive humour. I’m not seeing it tbh. “There are only two genders” is a joke so overdone it became part of some mainstream religions.
This is a quip

THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS...

Oh goody. Another one from the "only two genders and only one volume" brigade.

[The New California Republic]

Nah, there aren't. Also, SHOUTING doesn't somehow make your quip any more valid...

Would quip really be the right word here? A quip is defined as a witty remark, which breaks essentially to a comment showing or characterised by quick and inventive humour. I’m not seeing it tbh. “There are only two genders” is a joke so overdone it became part of some mainstream religions.
This is a quip

Oh goody. Another one from the "only two genders and only one volume" brigade.

Don't worry, I used it facetiously.