fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2505 ]

[ SECRET POST #2505 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2505 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 061 secrets from Secret Submission Post #358.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 16 - one persistent repeat spammer (I have tried to keep your non-repeats, however!) ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Only vaguely related but I cannot fucking believe how many people put a * after trans completely seriously. I mean what purpose does it serve? Inclusiveness? Because you don't need a fucking star for a word to have a wide meaning I mean Jesus Christ how much of a special snowflake can you be

Sorry I've been holding that in for awhile.

There's a star after "trans" because it's as close as you can get to putting a literal itty-bitty snowflake next to the word.

Not a lot of people know that.

Um, it's from programming, like many geek things on the net. A star is just a wildcard. Cos there's many different flavours of trans- and many people have a mutually exclusive identity, largely based on location and generation, so the transsexual ppl feel like they're not transgender and vice versa for very well-defined reasons, it's not a recent snowflake internet disagreement reason.

I agree its use can be gratuitous sometimes however.

Yes, I'm aware of the proclaimed reason.

OMG that's great.

Once I didn't put the *. I got reamed out. Never doing that again.

I'm trans and I say that if you don't put in the asterisk you will save me looking for a footnote that isn't there.

Anon below you - I hate it. Absolutely, deeply loathe it. For one, it screams special snowflakeyness. It's not a letter. It's not language. You can't say it. What am I supposed to do in everyday conversation, mime it? I find it alienating, not inclusive. I feel like I'm being ridiculed, actually, It's just awful.

Can I talk about my feelings on this

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"Latin@"<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

fucking abomination now because you just described them.

I had such a hard time figuring out how I was supposed to pronounce that. LATINAT? Eventually, I just gave up and tumblr savior'd it.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2013-11-12 15:17 (UTC) - Expand

What is that even supposed to mean?

It's annoying when some especially self-important people, usually from some sort of background in US academia, think they get to decide how everyone should refer to themselves.

(no subject)

hlagol - 2013-11-12 02:28 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

elephantinegrace - 2013-11-12 05:28 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

scrubber - 2013-11-12 06:49 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2013-11-12 06:53 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

scrubber - 2013-11-12 07:13 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2013-11-12 08:40 (UTC) - Expand

Auugh. It's like womyn all over again.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2013-11-12 02:15 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

mimi-sardinia.livejournal.com - 2013-11-12 23:35 (UTC) - Expand

lol calm down.

(no subject)

scrubber - 2013-11-12 04:06 (UTC) - Expand

I'm the person you're replying to and yeah, that's basically how I feel. If they want to include us in the word "trans" then they should just do that and not add a freaking star seriously what turbo douche thought that was a good idea?

uh I always thought the * was just "insert appropriate term here"... like transwoman, transman, transgender, transsexual... you want to not assume any or specify so you use the * as just kind of a "apply as needed". I do not get why so many people get so pissed at it. (though the "it's a literal snowflake" joke DID make me chuckle)

I get irritated by it because in intending to be inclusive it comes across to me as "well okay trans-WHATEVER person, don't care about individuals, want to just make sure i have ticked off the collective".

The thing is that saying "trans" without any kind of qualifier after it implies the same thing as having the asterisk, so it becomes redundant. But the cultural connotations attached to the asterisk - plus how some systems, such as tagging systems, handle that asterisk - make some people really pissed off with it. It started out as a computer joke (* = wildcard/"any" function in search logic, at least in certain contexts).

The new all-inclusive term should clearly be 'transbub'.

It's because there is a disagreement about what identities "trans" actually covers. So basically there's the earlier, less inclusive "trans" which some people prefer and then others use "trans*" to indicate that they are including some identities that fall outside of that, but are starting to gain more acceptance in the community. I think.

I understand the reason, I just don't like the stupid asterisk.

It';s supposed to be a Boolean operator. Searching "trans*" will show you results for "transgender", "transsexual", "trans man", "transfolk", "trans woman" (and "Transformers" and "trans-Atlantic" and everything else under the sun).
Personally, it drives me crazy because I always go looking at the bottom of the page for a footnote.

I'd rather use "trans-"; it's pronounced the same, used the same, looks pretty much the same, and it's obvious that we're dealing with a prefix on its own instead of an adjective with a footnote.

I'm trans myself (and I use that word as an adjective and not as a prefix; it describes the kind of man I am, just like you might say I'm a short man, or a verbose man, or an annoying man), so I really hope my opinion on the matter is worth something.

Edited 2013-11-12 04:50 (UTC)

i generally dont add the asterisk but it's meant to be inclusive of non-binary people. i'm not binary but i dont find the asterisk necessary personally. i think it's good to use it when referring to somebody who prefers it though.

in short the asterisk is meant to denote a catch-all term (trans*) for anybody who is not cis and some people find it valuable. it's not meant to seem extra special or anything. the asterisk has been used that way for a number of different things.

A while back I was emailing a friend and we were talking about the use of the asterisk, and every time one of us wrote trans* with the asterisk as an example, we'd add a silly footnote as a payoff. You do not leave footnotes hanging like that, just like you don't leave parentheses open or sentences unfinished.

In linguistics, an asterisk before a word means it's an unattested form. You use it for hypothetical reconstructions of dead languages, or for examples of verb tenses that don't actually exist (the past tense of snow is snowed, not *snew). And so it REALLY bothered me when I found an article explaining how the Boolean asterisk works in "trans**" and gave the examples of the word the asterisk might stand for thus: *gender, *sexual * man, * woman. My mind instantly went to "Are you trying to tell me that "gender" is an unattested English word? Because that is not the case"

*see what I did there?
** second footnote, same page, two asterisks, I'm being obstinate

TL;DR Boolean operators bother me. Fun with footnotes and unattested words!

Edited 2013-11-12 08:37 (UTC)

I mostly just hate the asterisk because it fucks with trying to search for useful information and a lot of tagging systems don't handle it well. And then there's the fact that even though trans and trans* are effectively the same these days and even many trans people oppose the asterisk, many SJWs will jump down your throat for not using it.

I'm confrontational enough that I'd rather just not use it and deal with the consequences as I go (I appear to have developed a reputation for this), but I can see why many people would use it even if they oppose it...SJWs in general can get quite vitriolic, but the trans-centric SJWs are probably the worst - if you're not actively involved with them, then you'll hear from them less often than race or sex centric ones, but when you do they are far, far more hostile and vicious than most other SJW types. -_-

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only