fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3563 ]

[ SECRET POST #3563 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3563 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Notorious]

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 16 secrets from Secret Submission Post #509.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

This is why radical feminists think trans activism is a cult.

All dissent must be shut down. Facts are irrelevant. Truth is irrelevant.

We've tried to discuss this with you multiple times in the past and nothing came of it sooooo

Facts can be spun. Truth can be spun. You're spinning them and no one's biting. Try somewhere else.

Me: "Some transwomen are predators, and they should be held accountable and not given a pass just because they are trans."

You: "OMG TRANSPHOBIA!!! Those weren't REAL transwomen they were cis men in dresses!!! No true Scotsman!"

Who's really spinning the truth here?

Uh, well, it looks to be you, since you're wildly claiming I say things. See? It's pointless, you only want a fight.

Not gonna reply any more, bye.

That's not really what you argued, though

What you argued was - and I'm trying to be extremely charitable here - that some transwomen are predators; therefore, the movement for trans rights is totally flawed, bathroom restriction bills are totally justified, and we would be justified in presuming that anyone who identifies as a trans woman is a sexual predator. And the whole time you were arguing this, of course, you implied (and used pronouns that implied) that trans women weren't actually women.

I have seen no evidence whatsoever that you're interested in a remotely balanced discussion on the topic, or that you have any empathy whatsoever with trans people, or that you are willing to grant a single shred of respect to them or acknowledge their identity for a single second. so, you know, fuck off.

"or that you have any empathy whatsoever with trans people"

No no no, it's not trans people, it's MALEs. I have difficulty feeling empathy for MALES. You haven't seen me say a word about transmen, have you? There's a reason for that. Namely, I used to be one. Then detransitioned, and I stopped kidding myself and realized how fucked trans activism had become.

The trans movement is it currently is is run by narcissistic abusive transwomen and their supporters who make excuses for abusers and predators. All sorts of fuckery runs rampant and no one is allowed to speak out against it because they're be called a TERF and blacklisted.

I have seen no evidence whatsoever that you're interested in a remotely balanced discussion on the topic, or that you have any empathy whatsoever with trans people, or that you are willing to grant a single shred of respect to them or acknowledge their identity for a single second. so, you know, fuck off.

"so, you know, fuck off."

Right back at ya, dear.

I don't mind if you fuck off or if you tell me to fuck off

The problem I have is when you keep crying about how f!s refuses to grant your arguments a fair hearing, at the same time as you're still talking like transwomen literally don't exist, and you still refuse to engage with genuine arguments against your position

Alright. Give me a genuine argument. One that DOESN'T rely on the bullshit idea that gender is innate but biological sex somehow isn't real. One that DOESN"T deny the fact that oppression of females is based in biological sex, not gender. One that DOESN'T utilize the No True Scotsman fallacy to claim trans predators aren't really trans.

I'm more than willing to listen.

The things that you have tried to admit as presuppitions are, themselves, the things that need to be argued

Only if you're a moronic tumblrina with zero understanding of history, biology, or real feminist theory.

Well, I don't agree that everyone who thinks that trans people exist is a moronic tumblrina with zero understanding of history, biology, or real feminist theory. I think that, if you think that's the case, this is probably not the board for you. I think, if you violently reject the basic concept that trans people exist, it's a little much to accuse others of being intellectual cowards who are too afraid to argue with you. And I think that trans people do exist.

Do I think trans people exist? Yes, obviously. I have met them in real life. As I said, I myself used to be one. I cannot deny the existence of people who identify of trans, and I never have. That's you putting words in my mouth.

What I have denied is that gender is innate. It is not. It's a social construct, and a harmful one at that.

Now I must ask if you believe all the following statements to be true, because you HAVE claimed my rejection of them is something that needs to be argued:
1) Gender is biological.
2) Biological sex does not exist.
3) Female women are not and never have been oppressed because of their biological sex.
4) Any transwoman who committed a crime wasn't REALLY trans; she was a cis man playing dressup.

Do you really, truly believe that all of the above statements are true?

I apologize if I implied that your rejection of each of those positions needed to be argued. I didn't mean to imply it if I did. What I wanted to imply was that your position as a whole needed to be argued. The parts of your position that I think really needed to be argued are (1) and (2).

I think that (3) is complicated, on the grounds that oppression is complex rather than simple. I think that (4) is untrue. It would be quite something if no transwoman ever committed a crime. It would be quite incredible for transwomen to be the only perfected subdivision of human beings ever to exist.

What I do think is that gender and sex are two broad, complicated categories, with an imperfect and partial relation to biology. What I think is that each individual person's relationship to those categories is distinct and complex.

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:22 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:35 (UTC) - Expand

DA

I reject the notion that the trans activist movement represents all trans people or that all trans people are part of, or in support of, everything about the movement, just like I reject the notion that every woman supports the feminist movement.

I reject the notion that a few horrible trans people represent the majority of trans people, in the exact same way that I reject that a few horrible feminists or a few horrible black people represent the majority of feminists or black people.

I reject the notion that forcing one group into a dangerous situation instead of another is a satisfactory solution to a problem, and I reject the notion that it's fine to base laws that target an entire group on the actions of a criminal few. I reject the illusion that safety can be ensured by simply making something illegal, because it sure as hell does not stop people who are criminals anyway.

There you go.

Okay, this might actually be the first solid argument I've seen here on this topic. Good for you.

"I reject the notion that forcing one group into a dangerous situation instead of another is a satisfactory solution to a problem, and I reject the notion that it's fine to base laws that target an entire group on the actions of a criminal few."

See, this is the part I'd contest, because there is literally no reason why instead of forcing female-bodied people to use the same bathrooms and locker rooms as male-bodied people (thus making some women very uncomfortable or triggered, and potentially putting others in physical danger), facilities can't have THREE rooms instead of two - one for males, one for females, and one gender neutral. This would solve so many problems, but every time I've seen someone propose this solution it gets shut down for somehow being transphobic.

NAYRT

most buildings in America have two bathrooms and don't have three

And that's something that can and should change.

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:25 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 06:12 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:03 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:08 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:10 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:15 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:32 (UTC) - Expand

The major issue that I have heard brought up would be that anyone going into the gender neutral bathroom would immediately be pegged by transphobes as possibly trans and a target for harassment.

If all bathrooms were gender neutral, this would not be possible. But if someone had to explicitly search for a gender neutral bathroom because they could not legally go into a male or female bathroom, this would be very obvious. In the same way that if all bathrooms were for "straights" or "other" and you had to find an "other" bathroom for yourself, everyone would know you're gay because you can't use the straight room. This would practically invite harassment from many more conservative areas.

"The major issue that I have heard brought up would be that anyone going into the gender neutral bathroom would immediately be pegged by transphobes as possibly trans and a target for harassment."

Such people can and should be prosecuted. If, as you claim, a transwoman who assaults someone in a bathroom will be prosecuted, then so will someone who assaults a trans person in a bathroom.

Look, trans people are going to be harassed no matter what bathroom they use. It's sad but true. Because our society is fucked and hates GNC people in general. If it's going to happen, shouldn't they at least have their own safe spaces? This is what I and other radical feminists advocate for; not depriving transwomen of safe spaces, but giving them their own exclusive safe spaces AND also providing exclusive safe spaces for female-bodied people. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

"In the same way that if all bathrooms were for "straights" or "other" and you had to find an "other" bathroom for yourself, everyone would know you're gay because you can't use the straight room."

This is not comparable, because there is no biological difference between a cis lesbian and cis heterosexual women. While they can potentially harm each other, they do not pose as much potential for harm as a male-bodied person would. This is why I get pissed off when people pretend biological sex isn't real, doesn't matter. It IS real and it DOES matter. Humans are a sexually dymorphic species (and before you bring up intersex people as a trump card; no the existence of intersex conditions does not make the species as a whole any less sexually dymorphic).

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:11 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:18 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:21 (UTC) - Expand

Re: ^ This is literally cultish behaviour.

(Anonymous) - 2016-10-06 05:18 (UTC) - Expand

lmao

you know, there are probably plenty of reddits where people would love your wankbaiting

No thanks, I'd rather leave the Cotton Ceiling activists to deal with the MRAs. They deserve each other.

No, you fucking imbecile.

Your "facts" (and I'm being generous and only using scare quotes because I'm not going to go into that pile of hate to see what they're saying, so congrats, you get my dubious benefit of the doubt about them being facts because of the sheer toxicity of your sources) but your "facts" are not irrelevant, they are simply not as important as the probability of actual innocent people being hurt. Saying "This trans person did something wrong" may be a fact, but "Look at all these trans people doing wrong things, let's judge and condemn the group" is not. We weigh up the possibility of your speech doing harm to innocent people and move the hateful shit down our list of priorities.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only