I’m going to stand behind my statement that you’re being demeaning for no reason then.
Let’s try this. I’m going to just change a few words, and let’s see how this feels to you:
That being said, if I was asked by a trans woman to only refer to them as a woman in all real world scenarios because that’s the gender they identify as, I simply cannot pander and think it’s a pretty unreasonable and fantastical expectation.
That would be a pretty shitty take considering all we know about being trans, right?
Why does it have to make sense to you for you to not be shitty about it?
Why put so much effort in to be antagonistic rather than just acknowledge and either ignore and move on or refer to others as they’d prefer?
I don’t consider it much different, personally. It doesn’t bother or offend me. It doesnt hurt me to call someone by whatever they want to be called.
What I don’t feel is a need to be hurtful in reference to their feelings.
You can change all the words you want, but that’s not what I said, and I feel it’s insincere to suggest the two statements are equal.
I’m allowed to draw a line and say, “this isn’t my burden to bear, and I don’t have to comply to simply avoid a rocked boat.”
The offensive part to me I suspect is the same thing op finds offensive, which is the expectation that I am to comply with what is clearly someone’s fantasy in all shape and definition.
We know gender identity is fluid and complex. We know sexuality is fluid and complex. The verdict is definitely way out there that species falls into this category, too.
I feel it’s insincere to suggest the two statements are equal.
I think its insincere to suggest they aren’t. After all…
what is clearly someone’s fantasy in all shape and definition.
The verdict is definitely way out there that species falls into this column, too.
These two statements seem to be completely opposed to each other.
Not to mention, that same attitude was held towards trans folks for a long time, wasn’t it? That they couldn’t possibly feel that way, and it was just an expression of homosexuality?
I was trying to be generous with the “verdict is way out there” part. There will never be a day where a human is actually a dragon.
I am aware of a woman who is also a cat. I watched her belly dance in a jungle to a track by the artist Deep Forest. It was the first time as a preteen that I realized how sensual women could be. Or rather, cat women.
There are people who have the genuine belief in their “other” aspect of themselves. So thats how they prefer to be referred to. I think poking fun at that is unnecessary and wrong, its kind of as simple as that. Not something exclusive to this situation, just a pretty decent general rule.
What I would say the verdict is absolutely out on is a “why”, and the impact it has on individuals. So a bit of courtesy and basic decency is all thats needed.
No, because the weaponization of race as a point of comparison to gender is done so specifically because of it’s historical context - even though it is just as much of a social construct.
It’s apples and oranges, but if apples had been enslaved on the basis of not being bananas for centuries, and oranges were being accused of not being a real fruit at all.
Get over yourself. It’s not for you to decide what identities are legitimate or not.
No, because the weaponization of race as a point of comparison to gender is done so specifically because of it’s historical context - even though it is just as much of a social construct.
Everything is a social construct, genius.
It’s apples and oranges, but if apples had been enslaved on the basis of not being bananas for centuries, and oranges were being accused of not being a real fruit at all.
The fuck.
Get over yourself. It’s not for you to decide what identities are legitimate or not.
No, that’s for you and your ilk to decide, of course, and to call anyone who disagrees fascists and transphobes.
Transracialism has way more merit than transpeciesism, though.
I grew up amongst hispanic families, and definitely don’t find it far fetched to identify with a different race, culturally and behaviorally. So I could see it, even though it might be a bit misplaced.
But simply feeling Black or Hispanic doesn’t make one Black or Hispanic; race is a cultural issue and culturally defined. Yet by the other commenter’s arguments, feeling Black or Hispanic would be enough to make them unquestionably valid, because we cannot question the feelings of others.
I think we took very different things from his book then.
Because I took away that there are people who genuinely believe it to be true for them. And since I don’t go around referring to people by their race, or interact with people based on their racial identity, I don’t have any reason to get myself involved beyond an “OK”.
I’m going to stand behind my statement that you’re being demeaning for no reason then.
Let’s try this. I’m going to just change a few words, and let’s see how this feels to you:
That would be a pretty shitty take considering all we know about being trans, right?
Why does it have to make sense to you for you to not be shitty about it?
Why put so much effort in to be antagonistic rather than just acknowledge and either ignore and move on or refer to others as they’d prefer?
I don’t consider it much different, personally. It doesn’t bother or offend me. It doesnt hurt me to call someone by whatever they want to be called.
What I don’t feel is a need to be hurtful in reference to their feelings.
You can change all the words you want, but that’s not what I said, and I feel it’s insincere to suggest the two statements are equal.
I’m allowed to draw a line and say, “this isn’t my burden to bear, and I don’t have to comply to simply avoid a rocked boat.”
The offensive part to me I suspect is the same thing op finds offensive, which is the expectation that I am to comply with what is clearly someone’s fantasy in all shape and definition.
We know gender identity is fluid and complex. We know sexuality is fluid and complex. The verdict is definitely way out there that species falls into this category, too.
I think its insincere to suggest they aren’t. After all…
These two statements seem to be completely opposed to each other.
Not to mention, that same attitude was held towards trans folks for a long time, wasn’t it? That they couldn’t possibly feel that way, and it was just an expression of homosexuality?
Anyway, I’m off for tonight, enjoy your night.
I was trying to be generous with the “verdict is way out there” part. There will never be a day where a human is actually a dragon.
I am aware of a woman who is also a cat. I watched her belly dance in a jungle to a track by the artist Deep Forest. It was the first time as a preteen that I realized how sensual women could be. Or rather, cat women.
There are people who have the genuine belief in their “other” aspect of themselves. So thats how they prefer to be referred to. I think poking fun at that is unnecessary and wrong, its kind of as simple as that. Not something exclusive to this situation, just a pretty decent general rule.
What I would say the verdict is absolutely out on is a “why”, and the impact it has on individuals. So a bit of courtesy and basic decency is all thats needed.
How do you feel about transracialism?
Isn’t this a common TERF comparison?
I didn’t realize TERFs often compared trans-species delusions to transracialism.
They compare transgender identities with transracialism. Close though.
It’s close because it… includes a comparison to transracialism somewhere?
Is any comparison to transracialism in any context TERF now? Because that’s the extent of the argument being presented.
Fucking ridiculous. Just throwing out labels and badjacketing in the hopes that it’ll stick.
No, because the weaponization of race as a point of comparison to gender is done so specifically because of it’s historical context - even though it is just as much of a social construct.
It’s apples and oranges, but if apples had been enslaved on the basis of not being bananas for centuries, and oranges were being accused of not being a real fruit at all.
Get over yourself. It’s not for you to decide what identities are legitimate or not.
Everything is a social construct, genius.
The fuck.
No, that’s for you and your ilk to decide, of course, and to call anyone who disagrees fascists and transphobes.
I haven’t called you a transphobe, at worst I accused you of being exclusionary, which as far as I can tell is actually what you are trying to be
Transracialism has way more merit than transpeciesism, though.
I grew up amongst hispanic families, and definitely don’t find it far fetched to identify with a different race, culturally and behaviorally. So I could see it, even though it might be a bit misplaced.
Like, that’s at least based in reality.
But simply feeling Black or Hispanic doesn’t make one Black or Hispanic; race is a cultural issue and culturally defined. Yet by the other commenter’s arguments, feeling Black or Hispanic would be enough to make them unquestionably valid, because we cannot question the feelings of others.
My only point is that transracialism could at least be argued as having a real world basis, rooted in complex experiences of culture and race.
Identifying as a dragon, not so much…
Historical or modern?
Or that the modern usage has some scientific basis, and its still being explored?
Short answer - its a subject thats still being explored but has a degree of scientific support, so I see no reason to be mean about it.
What the ever-loving fuck
Princeton, about ten years ago. I’ll dig up the materials tomorrow if you want.
Like I said, I like reading scientific materials.
If it’s Brubaker, he’s not saying what you think he is.
I think we took very different things from his book then.
Because I took away that there are people who genuinely believe it to be true for them. And since I don’t go around referring to people by their race, or interact with people based on their racial identity, I don’t have any reason to get myself involved beyond an “OK”.