|
elphiemcdork posted:To rule out *ever* being with a trans person because they might have different genitals than you expect is quite simplistic - I'm not saying that's the argument you were making, but it's the argument many people do make. It's simple but I don't think I'd call it simplistic: some people are not sexually interested in certain genitals. For example, some men enjoy having sex with women and a surprise penis throws a wrench in that. Does it even work correctly after taking hormones? Is it reasonable to expect someone who has never engaged with that set of genitals, commonly associated with a gender they don't date, to suddenly be interested in working with them just because someone they could date has them? It sounds easier to find someone else to date with the expected genitals for the gender than to try to force yourself to be sexually attracted to something you never have been. edit: lol I just noticed the part of your post where you said boobs and vaginas are not physical characteristics of women. Are you trolling? ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 13:42 on May 20, 2015 |
#
¿
May 20, 2015 13:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
Paladinus posted:If vaginas are not exclusively female, why do MtF trans people usually want to have one? Why bother with wearing women's clothes if clothes with gender binary embedded in them are just a cultural construct. So is language that prescribes certain pronouns to certain genders. Maybe genders and sexes don't exist at all... Yeah, that's the thing that trips me up most about trying to understand. If sex and gender are reduced to cultural norms, then where does the dysphoria fit in, if there is no biological essence of sex or gender? Wouldn't that mean being trans shouldn't exist as a thing if gender is just a meaningless construct?
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Series DD Funding posted:Sex is physical characteristics. Gender is an oppressive caste system. Then what does "transgender" mean if gender is an oppressive system derived from society rather than anything inherent? Does it mean you still want to participate in an oppressive system but change your position in it? I guess that's capitalism too, for working leftists.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
So is everyone just going to get enraged by Tautologicus, or does anyone have any thoughts on the following question that I've asked a few times that keeps going unanswered:ashgromnies posted:Then what does "transgender" mean if gender is an oppressive system derived from society rather than anything inherent?
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
AngryRobotsInc posted:I can't answer for anyone else, but as I've always understood it sex and gender (in terms of identity) are inherent, but not nearly as black and white as many assume. There are several intersex conditions that muddy the waters, for example. So you, personally, find "gender is a social construct" to be misleading? Is "gender roles are a social construct" a more appropriate way of saying it?
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
HMS Boromir posted:This isn't a direct reply to this so much as a return to an earlier topic of discussion, but how does everyone feel about the idea of changing your mind about wanting to have sex with someone because their genitals don't match the sex they present as / the corresponding gender they identify as? Do you figure anyone who likes women and isn't a conscious transphobe but wouldn't want to have sex with a penis-haver is just expressing latent homophobia/transphobia, or is that a valid preference? It just shouldn't matter. A straight man should be down to choke on a dick and catch a load every once in a while, because some women have them.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
Flagrant Abuse posted:Often, yes. In many places, it's fully legal to fire (or just not hire in the first place) someone for being trans. Even places where it's not legal, it's easy for an employer to just bullshit up an excuse. One of the few comprehensive surveys on the matter found that 44% of all respondents had been refused a job as a direct result of being trans, and 26% were fired from their current job because of it (Grant, Mottet & Tanis, 2011). So when you have trouble finding work, you start to take drastic measures to make ends meet. Even with non-discrimination laws in place, in effect isn't it largely still legal to fire someone for being a "protected class" under At-Will Employment if it's impossible to prove their membership in that class was why they were fired? Seems like an intractable problem to solve through legislation, besides the most flagrant and obvious examples. Sounds like it requires the change of opinions. ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 14:28 on May 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
May 28, 2015 14:25
|
|