[ SECRET POST #5396 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5396 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.








Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 31 secrets from Secret Submission Post #772.
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

[erinptah]

What I question is why OP thinks "it's normal to know specific details about the genitalia of random people in public bathrooms."

Also, what's supposed to be the downside of kids going on puberty blockers with "hardly any screening." If someone gets on blockers and then decides they don't like it, they can, uh, stop. It's not hard.

[(Anonymous)]

op is saying that those are things jkr cares about and believes in, not that they are reasonable

OP

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, thank you anon, you are precisely right.

Also, ftr, this is as far into this secret's comments as I will be responding. So if anybody below this point is being legit transphobic and claiming to be the OP, they're not, they're just a troll.

[(Anonymous)]

There have been some reports of puberty blockers leading to infertility I think? Not that I personally think that's particularly horrible but it's not like it's completely devoid of potential side effects. You know, like most medication.

[(Anonymous)]

There are reports of just about every medication leading to infertility. Infertility is like cancer and heart disease in that it is a stock warning they slap on just about everything. There are so many possible causes of infertility that it is pointless to try and lay it at the door of just one thing anyway. Sounds more like someone went out shopping for a reason, and bootstrapped that argument onto it.

[(Anonymous)]

If you seriously think there is any medication without side effects just because it doesn't fit your agenda, you're either stupid or naive. Are potential side effects worth risking if the medication has the desired effect? Probably. Do they magically disappear just because you don't like it? Nope.

[(Anonymous)]

The sad thing is that you’re not even saying anything AYRT is disagreeing with, but you’re too dense and angry to tell.

[(Anonymous)]

Did your reading comprehension always suck this much?

[(Anonymous)]

Um, while I will say that yes, some warnings and indications are overused (possibly due to aggressive CYA or those bizarre California laws - yes, me writing this down has been know to cause cancer in lab animals), but for something affecting hormones directly related to reproduction to possibly have effects on fertility? That would not be in any way surprising to me and would actually be something that I would sort of expect.

[(Anonymous)]

"Utereus-haver might not be able pump out babies" is a hell of a thing to prioritize over the kid's mental health.

[(Anonymous)]

da

I'm not sure whether you're a troll or just incredibly dim, but acknowledging the potential side effects of a medication is not prioritizing having babies over a kid's mental health. It is, in fact, a crucial element of the decision-making process, and of that whole "informed consent" thing.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

I did not say anything about prioritization at all (also, this would be true for people with functional reproductive organs of all sexes). I was commenting on the fact that it is weird not to acknowledge that something that affects reproductive health might affect all parts of it, that this isn't about a warning just being strapped on. It also wouldn't necessarily be considered a negative thing for some people.

[(Anonymous)]

Do you know what else has a profound effect on your hormones which has been proven through extensive research? Parabens. Do you know where they are? In almost every make-up and beauty product.

https://www.ewg.org/what-are-parabens

Parabens can act like the hormone estrogen in the body and disrupt the normal function of hormone systems affecting male and female reproductive system functioning, reproductive development, fertility and birth outcomes. Parabens can also interfere with the production of hormones.

Adolescent girls who wear makeup every day had 20 times the levels of propylparaben in their urine compared to those who never or rarely wear makeup (Berger 2018). The use of body and face lotions, hair products, sunscreens and makeup have all been predictors of and correlated with remarkably increased levels of urinary parabens (Sahki 2018, Nassan 2017, Braun 2014 and Fisher 2017).

Weird that we don't ban selling make-up products to teenage girls, but puberty blockers is a hill so many people want to die on.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm confused? I don't think OP is objecting to those things themselves. I think OP is saying that those are the things JKR objects to. OP doesn't want to know details about the genitalia of people using public restrooms, but JKR's view of trans people is founded on things like that.

Just including trans people in the HP universe, in itself, wouldn't offend JKR, because that's not the way that JKR frames the debate. JKR frames the debate in a way where she claims to be totally accepting and tolerant of trans people *unless* they cross whatever red lines or violate whatever shibboleths she has in her head. Of course, the reality is that she's not actually accepting of trans people at all, and the red lines she has in her head are actually things that are just necessary for trans people to live their lives. But OP's point (as I understand it) is that, because JKR understands the debate in this way, including trans people in HP isn't intrinsically offensive to JKR unless they cross those red lines.

[(Anonymous)]

+1

[erinptah]

Hmm, maybe there's a disconnect because I wasn't seeing this as a genuine assessment of "how JKR perceives trans people" in the first place.

One of those red lines she's drawn in her head is, famously, "I can't accept when you say 'people who menstruate' instead of saying 'women'." If your HP fic includes a trans character who has (or, let's be real, who ever had) periods, and doesn't refer to them as a woman -- that's demonstrably all it takes to raise JKR's hackles.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't agree but it's way too complicated to explain why. Sorry.

[(Anonymous)]

The bathroom issue is dumb but there are a lot more people that object to sharing intimate quarters (women's shelters for one) with penis people than you're willing to admit. Get out of here with that 'you need to get over your discomfort and trauma surrounding penises so you won't hurt other's fee fees' bullshit.

[(Anonymous)]

hurt other's fee fees??? you stupid fuck, how can you advocate for women's safety and then go "oh except for those women, because they may or may not have a penis and that's uncomfortable :("
you think trans women don't get abused? you think trans women don't get raped? they don't get stalked? killed? you think people with vaginas don't abuse women???

for some reason you realise that forcing a women to be sheltering with men when she has "discomfort and trauma" surrounding them would be cruel, but then you go out and say well trans women just have to suck it up because i'm imagining their dicks and that is somehow their fault.

fuck offfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

[(Anonymous)]

Build shelters that are specifically trans inclusive. Acknowledging trans women are different is a no no, so that will never happen.

Here's a suggestion: Just like you tell cis women to go to therapy to get over their penis problems, tell penis people to go to therapy so they can realize there are cis women who will NEVER want to share close quarters with penises. Thanks.

[(Anonymous)]

The problem is, trauma isn't logical. It's trauma.

If a cis woman is in a shelter because she's been raped and abused by a man, and has serious trauma about being in close quarters with somebody with XY anatomy, the fact that trans women are women isn't going to make that any better or less traumatising for her.

It doesn't matter how much you cry 'transphobia' and get all lower-case angry about it, it's not that woman's fault that she's terrified to be in a room with somebody with XY anatomy. It's just how it is. And while transwomen are women, they have the XY anatomy. It goes beyond genitals. Late transitions have the wide shoulders and general outline of cis men. That can be triggering to somebody who has experienced trauma at the hands of men.

That isn't to say that transwomen don't belong in womens shelters, but there's a lot more nuance than you are putting into this. You're a shitty person, elevating one woman's trauma over another. Both can coexist without being shut up in a room together at the expense of one's comfort. Stop being a dickbag and pitting the different trauma of women and transwomen against each other.

It's great that you advocate for transwomen. What fuels the fire of the terf dipshits is that you're advocating for them at the expense of cis women with real, deep-seated trauma. Women and transwomen are not the same. They have different fights. There's a lot of intersection, of course there is, but to act like there's no difference between the two is absurd.

(The stupid bathroom debate does not enter into this, since a cis man can easily walk into a woman's bathroom at any time and do what they want -- there's no cameras, there's no penis alarms, it's a strawman argument. Shelters, however, are different.)

You do not put somebody with trauma in a room with the thing that causes that trauma. You don't put an arachnophobe in a room with a spider. You don't lock somebody terrified of dogs in a room with a dog. You don't put a transwoman in a room with a bunch of men if she's bean beaten up by men. You don't put a woman who is scared of being raped by a cis man in a room with somebody with XY anatomy, no matter how she identifies.

It's not fair on either of them and no self-respecting transwoman, either pre- or post gender confirmation surgery, would demand to be put in a room with a traumatised rape victim to prove a point and if she does then she, like you, is a fucking dick. No transperson I know (and I know a lot, since they're my community) would advocate for putting their comfort over another victim's when there was literal trauma on the table.

There should be different comfort levels at women's shelters. Some cis women are more or less happy to be with a transwoman. Some, the ones mentioned in the rest of this post, are not, and that's understandable. It's not deliberate discrimination, it's trauma. You don't get to tell a traumatised person that they're being stupid or cruel. You don't get the blame a victim for their traumatized reactions to triggers out of their control. If people could control their reactions to triggers, they wouldn't be fucking triggers.

Get bent.

[(Anonymous)]

My question with this is always - people can have trauma over a bunch of different things, right? Penises aren't the only thing that people can have trauma about. And having trauma sucks. It's shitty and we should absolutely do what we can to help people who have that trauma in whatever way they need help. It's not something we can just ask people to get over, we should provide whatever support we can and whatever accommodations are reasonably possible for whatever kind of trauma you want to talk about. But it seems to me like you can't actually plan your social support systems around every form of trauma that someone might hypothetically have. And it feels like the primary reason for emphasizing this one form of trauma as against any other form of trauma is, frankly, prejudice. So it just doesn't seem like a good justification.

IDK. That's just how I see it.

[(Anonymous)]

This.

[(Anonymous)]

By your logic, all shelters should be separated by race because what if a white woman has trauma related to black people

[(Anonymous)]

Cis/AFAB/XX Black women and cis/AFAB/XX white women are both cis women. People born with penises of all races and genders are still people born with penises. Also cis women in shelters are there, more often than not, because they were abused by cis male partners or family members. Nice try.

Why do you people always try to bring cis Black women into this?