TDT 4: What the $#@! is a "womxn", anyways?

[Fahran]

...No. It is simply the belief that being trans has a medical reason.

Which can be seen as exclusive as some here have pointed out.

[Hediacrana]

-snip-

Facts don't care about your copy-pasted memes.

[Cekoviu]

Is actually not.


The belief that someone isn’t really Trans unless they have gender dysphoria and go through all the surgeries.

Ah, I see. What does it even mean to be "really Trans" anyway?

Depends on whom you ask

[Grenartia]

Perhaps you think its a strawman, but it isn't to those of us who have been harmed by the things most transmeds say and call for.



We can maintain (or even increase) access to transition while eliminating the exclusionary and backwards standards used under 'medicalization'.



Its already hard enough for many trans people to transition, because of the unnecessary and harmful restrictions powered by the standards you're defending. We can make it easier for all of us to transition by getting rid of those standards, and the restrictions they cause.

No. Here, I'm only able to get treatment because it is covered by the NHS. If it were demedicalised, it wouldn't be covered by the NHS.

Maybe the better option is to reform the NHS.

Though I don't support exclusionism - nor do most transmeds. There's absolutely NO point debating that here, though.

Perhaps there is value in discussing it, because most of us who have dealt with transmeds have overwhelmingly encountered exclusionary rhetoric and treatment from them. In fact, I'll go right out and say that you're the only non-exclusionary transmed I've ever encountered, and I wouldn't be surprised if others said the same. That is why we oppose it, because all of our experience with transmedicalism has been exclusionary, so we can only presume that either it is inherently exclusionary, or its biggest proponents and most influential advocates are exclusionary. In either case, it cannot be supported, lest it be instituted and exclusion take hold.

Informed consent and being covered as an essential service should not go away for those who are physically transitioning, but medicalizing being trans would put pressure people into getting procedures they may not want, and only did it to clear the gate and fit in with the real transsexuals™.

This, so much.

Ah, I see. What does it even mean to be "really Trans" anyway?

Depends on whom you ask

Ask 10 people, get 15 answers.

[Webus]

Wow i m the only person to answer cis, they them. I feel so special.

[Fahran]

Wow i m the only person to answer cis, they them. I feel so special.

How? Royal plural?

[Grenartia]

Wow i m the only person to answer cis, they them. I feel so special.

How? Royal plural?

I mostly included that one in case there was an intersex person whose gender identity is non-binary. Technically, they'd be cis in that case.

[Hanafuridake]

Thread hasn't been active in a while. Let's start it up again.
transmedicalism

Often self-defeating because a lot of transgender people with dysphoria don't know they have dysphoria, so gatekeeping can ironically hurt the people it's supposed to help. I used to be unable to look in a mirror because of facial hair, and thought that was completely normal for a cis male to experience for some reason (because I had no other experience to go off of other than my own).

[Cekoviu]

How? Royal plural?

I mostly included that one in case there was an intersex person whose gender identity is non-binary. Technically, they'd be cis in that case.

[a million transphobes screeching in pain]

Thread hasn't been active in a while. Let's start it up again.
transmedicalism

Often self-defeating because a lot of transgender people with dysphoria don't know they have dysphoria, so gatekeeping can ironically hurt the people it's supposed to help. I used to be unable to look in a mirror because of facial hair, and thought that was completely normal for a cis male to experience for some reason (because I had no other experience to go off of other than my own).

That's a very good point. I'd wager that some of the people who "don't have physical dysphoria" just don't realize they do. Not specifically talking about anybody here, just people in general.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I wouldn't say that I am a transmedicalist, however, I do think that dysphoria is necessary to be trans, with the caveat that dysphoria include social dysphoria. As gender is socially constructed (as must clearly be the case, for we cannot define masculinity or femininity without observing it in our surroundings), it is therefore said that the disconnect between internal state of mind and social interaction creates a kind of dysphoria which is unbearable and is only reconcilable when there is transition. Imo, someone who lacks this social dysphoria is mistaking personality traits for femininity.

[Cekoviu]

I wouldn't say that I am a transmedicalist, however, I do think that dysphoria is necessary to be trans, with the caveat that dysphoria include social dysphoria.

I mean, that's pretty much still transmedicalism

As gender is socially constructed (as must clearly be the case, for we cannot define masculinity or femininity without observing it in our surroundings)

Nooo, you fell into this as well??

[United Muscovite Nations]

I wouldn't say that I am a transmedicalist, however, I do think that dysphoria is necessary to be trans, with the caveat that dysphoria include social dysphoria.

I mean, that's pretty much still transmedicalism

As gender is socially constructed (as must clearly be the case, for we cannot define masculinity or femininity without observing it in our surroundings)

Nooo, you fell into this as well??

I think that gender in the social sense is constructed, but that the internal neurological process which produces it is not. It is when the two misalign that dysphoria takes place.

[Cekoviu]

I mean, that's pretty much still transmedicalism

Nooo, you fell into this as well??

I think that gender in the social sense is constructed, but that the internal neurological process which produces it is not. It is when the two misalign that dysphoria takes place.

hwæt

[United Muscovite Nations]

I think that gender in the social sense is constructed, but that the internal neurological process which produces it is not. It is when the two misalign that dysphoria takes place.

hwæt

There is femininity and masculinity inherent, but this cannot be recognized for what it is without society defining them for the person to relate into.

e.g. I could not know that my mind expresses itself as male without seeing the distinction between male and female in society.

[Cekoviu]

hwæt

There is femininity and masculinity inherent, but this cannot be recognized for what it is without society defining them for the person to relate into.

e.g. I could not know that my mind expresses itself as male without seeing the distinction between male and female in society.

That wouldn't require society to notice, just another human being. Gender (male/female, not masculine/feminine) is not a social construct.

[United Muscovite Nations]

There is femininity and masculinity inherent, but this cannot be recognized for what it is without society defining them for the person to relate into.

e.g. I could not know that my mind expresses itself as male without seeing the distinction between male and female in society.

That wouldn't require society to notice, just another human being. Gender (male/female, not masculine/feminine) is not a social construct.

Two people is still a social interaction.

[Fahran]

I mostly included that one in case there was an intersex person whose gender identity is non-binary. Technically, they'd be cis in that case.

I don't really view such people as cis personally, but I do get why they might want to employ they/their as pronouns.

[Fahran]

Two people is still a social interaction.

Honestly, objecting to the social construction of gender usually lends itself to a gender essentialist argument which is even more exclusionary to people who do not exhibit symptoms of dysphoria. I think that last alternative reduces gender to a set of feelings or personality traits or a personal choice - which makes gender functionally useless for social interactions. I think the most practical, functional, and sensible definition of gender sticks to social construction with biological traits influencing it substantially. Or, in simple terms, UMN makes good argument. Fahr agree.

[Auzkhia]

When I was questioning my gender I tried on they/them pronouns before I admitted I was not my assigned gender.

So, in a sense, I was a cis person using they/them, along with he/him lol

But I primarily use she/her now.

Pronouns are more about presentation and expression rather than identity. Some gender non-conforming people use them as such.

Though, I don't know anyone who identifies as both cisgender and non-binary. But I know some non-binary people who do claim the label of trans either, more cisn't– not cis.

[Cekoviu]

I mostly included that one in case there was an intersex person whose gender identity is non-binary. Technically, they'd be cis in that case.

I don't really view such people as cis personally, but I do get why they might want to employ they/their as pronouns.

If they were assigned X at birth, they would be, but that's not normally what happens with intersex people.

[Fahran]

If they were assigned X at birth, they would be, but that's not normally what happens with intersex people.

Well, culturally, we haven't had a lot of space for intersex people. Usually, we take the distinguishable gendered traits they possess and make the decision to assign them a gender based on that. Depending on the precise condition, they might well hold to the assigned gender without issue - but then those people wouldn't be intersex. They'd be cis and whatever gender they were assigned at birth, with gendered traits that might not necessarily adhere to that gender neatly. Plus I think people who exist beyond the binary tend to get wrapped up in trans terminology a lot of the time, at least from the people of cis people who fall within the binary and aren't familiar with LGBT+ stuff.

[Luminesa]

Two people is still a social interaction.

Honestly, objecting to the social construction of gender usually lends itself to a gender essentialist argument which is even more exclusionary to people who do not exhibit symptoms of dysphoria. I think that last alternative reduces gender to a set of feelings or personality traits or a personal choice - which makes gender functionally useless for social interactions. I think the most practical, functional, and sensible definition of gender sticks to social construction with biological traits influencing it substantially. Or, in simple terms, UMN makes good argument. Fahr agree.

It’s a balance between nature and nurture, and we can’t throw out one for the other. It’s impossible to say someone is a boy without giving that person an impression of what “boy” means. You can change what it means, but it will still exist. I think that might be why understanding “they/them” is a foreign process for a lot of people. “They/them” has no gender, and is most often used to denote someone whose gender you already know. Or it is used in the plural to refer to multiple people of a mix of genders, or of a group of genders. So it becomes hard to get an impression, for many people, of what “they” means when referring to a person.

[Antityranicals]

If they were assigned X at birth, they would be, but that's not normally what happens with intersex people.

Well, culturally, we haven't had a lot of space for intersex people. Usually, we take the distinguishable gendered traits they possess and make the decision to assign them a gender based on that. Depending on the precise condition, they might well hold to the assigned gender without issue - but then those people wouldn't be intersex. They'd be cis and whatever gender they were assigned at birth, with gendered traits that might not necessarily adhere to that gender neatly. Plus I think people who exist beyond the binary tend to get wrapped up in trans terminology a lot of the time, at least from the people of cis people who fall within the binary and aren't familiar with LGBT+ stuff.

Here's the thing: Isn't it a bit sexist to say that someone who acts stereotypically male or stereotypically female is necessarily therefore that stereotypical gender? Why is gender a mental thing anyway? Why can't we just say that boys can act girly and still be boys, and vice versa?

[Cekoviu]

Well, culturally, we haven't had a lot of space for intersex people. Usually, we take the distinguishable gendered traits they possess and make the decision to assign them a gender based on that. Depending on the precise condition, they might well hold to the assigned gender without issue - but then those people wouldn't be intersex. They'd be cis and whatever gender they were assigned at birth, with gendered traits that might not necessarily adhere to that gender neatly. Plus I think people who exist beyond the binary tend to get wrapped up in trans terminology a lot of the time, at least from the people of cis people who fall within the binary and aren't familiar with LGBT+ stuff.

Here's the thing: Isn't it a bit sexist to say that someone who acts stereotypically male or stereotypically female is necessarily therefore that stereotypical gender?

Nobody is saying that here.

Why is gender a mental thing anyway?

Who knows? It just is.

Why can't we just say that boys can act girly and still be boys, and vice versa?

They can. People can also be trans.

[Proctopeo]

Here's the thing: Isn't it a bit sexist to say that someone who acts stereotypically male or stereotypically female is necessarily therefore that stereotypical gender?

Nobody is saying that here.

Why is gender a mental thing anyway?

Who knows? It just is.

Why can't we just say that boys can act girly and still be boys, and vice versa?

They can. People can also be trans.

While it's not been mentioned here (at least not recently), Antityranicals is describing a very real trend. One that's annoying at best.