[ SECRET POST #3945 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3945 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 47 secrets from Secret Submission Post #565.
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.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

It's kind of hard to ignore that your arguments and concerns are closely linked to trans-exclusionary radical feminism.

Personally, I fundamentally don't agree that having an FTM trans identity entails erasing gay men, or that it implies that "the only way to be happy is to become men", or that taking gender seriously is the same as elevating it over all other things. Ultimately, I think those are kind of ridiculous arguments with no real purpose other than dismissing peoples' identities and their being.

[(Anonymous)]

And I think it's ridiculous to accuse people of (gasp!) "trans-exclusionary radical feminism" as a way of shutting down debate, so here we are. I guess we'll have to disagree.

[(Anonymous)]

I outlined some substantive disagreements in the post

But, yeah, like, I'm not just going to ignore the fact that your arguments are coming from a particular ideological point of view that I'm pretty familiar with and which I've never seen make any arguments that I found ultimately compelling

[(Anonymous)]

I think I'm also quite familiar with the ideology that underlies your arguments, and while I don't have a snappy derogatory label to slap on it, I've never found it particularly compelling either.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure.

[(Anonymous)]

different anon here

You explained that you disagree with their points but not why the points themselves were faulty.

[(Anonymous)]

Sure. That's fair. I think there's a ton of stuff elsewhere in the thread that's much more involved already, and I also think that a lot of these are arguments that are by their very nature difficult to refute.

For instance, talking about "young women who feel that the only way to become happy is to become men" is an argument that fundamentally assumes the point that we're arguing about. Characterizing FTM people as young women who want to become young men to be happy is at odds with the basic idea of trans identities being real. Same with saying that someone who transitions from female to male is erasing women.

Similarly, it's hard to figure out how to argue against the idea that vague, totally unspecified "social forces" are driving people to identify as trans. How are you supposed to argue against something that's so generic? It's basically a scare quote.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

Understood your other points but had some trouble with the following one:

"Characterizing FTM people as young women who want to become young men to be happy is at odds with the basic idea of trans identities being real."

How so? I haven't really had an in depth look at this sort of thing, so please correct me if I'm misunderstanding, using the wrong word or something, but my understanding of trans people is that they're people who feel discomfort with their physical sexual characteristics and the gender roles assigned to those characteristics to the point they want to transition to reduce that discomfort. So wouldn't someone born as a woman but felt discomfort with that at the very least feel relief with a transition to a man? How is it invalidating his current identity to acknowledge he were formerly perceived as female?

[(Anonymous)]

*he was

I bet there's more typos.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think that the language that anon used merely acknowledged that trans males are AFAB. That's the problem that I have. The whole idea, if we're talking about their identity, which is how I take OP to be talking, is that trans males are men.

[(Anonymous)]

I would also add that your disagreements were not, by my estimation, particularly substantive; you simply asserted that you found my arguments ridiculous and accused me of dismissing other people's identities.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think your post was all that substantive to start with.

And your post does inescapably and undeniably dismiss peoples' identities. Because the whole assumption that your post is framed around is that FTM people are women.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, for fuck's sake. "Woman" and "man" are immutable biological realities. (Yes, to a certain extent they are also social roles, but they shouldn't be.)

As for the social forces driving the uptick in trans-identified individuals: let's start with sexism, homophobia, and social contagion (see Carl Elliot's excellent essay "A New Way to be Mad"). Please note that I am not claiming that trans people themselves are sexist and homophobic; I am simply suggesting that sexism and homophobia probably encourage some people to identify as trans.

[(Anonymous)]

I am simply suggesting that sexism and homophobia probably encourage some people to identify as trans.

How does that drive an *increase* in people identifying as trans? Because that's what we're trying to explain here. So are we saying that sexism and homophobia have increased recently, or are we saying that there's been some fundamental change in how they operate, or what?

[(Anonymous)]

OP.

I do think that sexism has increased in recent years, in ways that particularly affect children and adolescents. A few decades ago, children's toys were relatively unisex; now there's a glaring divide between "boy's toys" and "girl's toys," and girls get stuck with a frilly shitload of pretty pink princess crap.

And then, when girls hit puberty, they are doing so in a world in which extreme pornography is just a click away at all times. I'm not dogmatically, absolutely anti-porn, but I do think that it conditions the behavior and expectations of young people—especially boys—in a way that isn't particularly healthy. And girls growing up in the era of ubiquitous internet porn are exposed to a lot of damaging notions about what it means to be a woman.

[(Anonymous)]

So, just to be clear here, your argument is that 2017 is more sexist than, for instance, 1967.

[(Anonymous)]

Did you not read my post?

[(Anonymous)]

woman & man are gender identities :)

[(Anonymous)]

WTF is a gender identity? :)

No, seriously. I understand that social roles are assigned based on sex, but I think that for all our differences, we probably both agree that this is fucked up. Girls shouldn't be raised to be pretty and passive while boys are raised to be tough and assertive. Women shouldn't be stuck with a disproportionate share of childcare and housework while men are encouraged to devote themselves to their careers.

But if gender isn't the host of tired old sex role stereotypes that we both recognize as regressive, then what the hell is it? A purely subjective internal feeling completely unmoored from both biological sex and social role? And if so, then why is it so vitally important that we constantly affirm its reality?

[(Anonymous)]

"And if so, then why is it so vitally important that we constantly affirm its reality?"

Because, like it or not, majority of people are happy with it. Majority of girls want to wear pink, frilly dresses and playing with dolls, and majority of boys don't wish to do the same. People who diverge from traditional gender norms exist, and their preferences ought to be acknowledged and respected, but they exist in a minority.

Do you know what else has no biological basis? Culture. There exists no biological link between being a certain race and liking certain types of music. And the idea that all African Americans like rap music is, of course, a tired old stereotype. So does this mean that it's our duty to insist that rap is a white people's music, just as much as it is a black people's music? Would it be racist for African Americans to take offense to that claim and stress the cultural roots of rap?

I imagine your answer to that question would be a resounding "no". Stereotypes are one thing, and cultural identity is another, and stereotypes existing doesn't invalidate cultural identity and things associated with it. The same goes for gender identity and things associated with it. Just because there is no biological link between dolls and girls, centuries have made dolls strongly associated with feminity and just as many black people embrace rap and take pride in it, many girls embrace and take pride in stereotypically feminine activities. You are not doing them a favor by trying to erase their identity.

Of course, this often leads to the minority of people who don't share majority's feelings and preferences to feel excluded. But there are ways to fight the exclusion that doens't invovle trying to invalidate other people's feelings and identity.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

True. Generally speaking, I think it's silly to scapegoat trans people for problems that are pervasive in American culture.