Shechemite
Be the sun and all will see you
Like ‘the gays/Asians/Mentals etc’ I guess.
Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?
- Thread starter The Flying Pig
- Start date
- Status
Like ‘the gays/Asians/Mentals etc’ I guess.
Miranda Yardley
Willing Warrior.
This is the real story:
(Page 12, RHS).
Also, 414/871 described themselves as being 'non-binary' or 'trans non-binary'.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
No. Cis has been used as a slur plenty of times I agree, but I haven't seen Sea Star display that tendency, she has her back up definitely, as anyone would reading this thread where posts have been increasingly careless in almost-but-not-quite failing to differentiate between Transwomen and creepy men. Again I am going to label people, but could they not at least make some effort to not wander into the territory where their posts sound pretty prejudiced?
FabricLiveBaby!
Live Baby Fabric!
No I don't accept that. People get called TERF who are not radical feminists. I hadn't even heard of radical feminism until I started asking about gender identity in anything other than a shallow way.
Men get called TERFS (but not as frequently), which is bizarre.
I don't think anyone here being called a TERF even thought they were radicals.
So I don't accept your statement at all.
Men get called TERFS (but not as frequently), which is bizarre.
I don't think anyone here being called a TERF even thought they were radicals.
So I don't accept your statement at all.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
The bastards!
Vintage Paw
dead stare and computer glare
I'm cool with Trans Exclusionary Regular Feminist.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
They do exist though, forget the radical I would have thought the TE part is what people are mostly objecting to, though it appears to be what they are arguing in favour of. Being a radical feminist is alright, far better than a moderate one. We need fighters not liberals !
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
I feel bullied into dropping the radge, it's as if they seek to exclude working class Scots too FFS :-D
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
don't drop the radge
This is not what I said, I said she had been an invited speaker at a previous meeting held by this organisation, I had no idea she was in Manchester as well, only goes to show how close she is to this group.
If 51% of respondants were disabled, which is a curious statistic and one that very much depends on what measure of disability you use, then even so, why is that the 'real' story. Is widespread violence, discrimination and abuse a bit boring or something?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
These are the results of a questionnaire, so it would need to be investigated further what that 51% represents.
I'm with smokedout, though. How you can read that and pick this out as the real story beggars belief. The real story about transgender people that this report highlights is that they are far more likely to be marginalised, vulnerable and discriminated against than the general population. That can get lost in the noise on this thread sometimes.
Miranda Yardley
Willing Warrior.
Going back 25 years ago, non-binary didn't really seem to exist on any level at all.
It's the real story because it's way out of step with the rest of the population. I think it would be a valid question to ask why so many people identifying as trans consider themselves disabled, to what degree, and by what measurement. Again, when it comes down to identifying needs, we can only do this on the basis of facts.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Oh did it not now? Or is this the foucauldian it didn't exist because the terminology wasn't there?
Being as we can all recall mirandayardleystatsgate perhaps in the spirit of camden's housing repairs - right first time - you could supply a reputable source to substantiate your claim.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
Maybe that's exactly what was meant. Ie. it wasn't a "thing". Not that there weren't people who were whatever non-binary is (still a little foggy on that front - definitions seem to vary).
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Let's give the liar Yardley a minute or two to try to cobble together something convincing
I think it would be a valid question, particularly if the measure includes things like substance misuse and mental health and would further confirm the marginalisation of trans people. But it's not the only statistic that is way out of step with the general population and to highlight it as the 'real story' suggests an attempt to undermine what the rest of the report says.
Which is not uncommon amongst some trans critical feminists. Every time a report is released showing the horrifying violence and discrimination trans people face, and the toll it takes on their health, it is immediately leapt on, torn apart and the slightest details used to undermine any conclusions. If this happened to a report examining violence faced by women then such hyper-scrutiny would be attacked, rightly, as misogynist. If it happened to report looking at racial discrimination then those doing it would be accused of racism. But to even suggest the people doing this to research looking into trans people might be transphobic is silencing all women who just want to have a conversation.
Last edited:
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Lots of the stats on that report are way out of step with the general population. I agree that it is valid to drill down into what that figure means, and it would also be valid to compare the stats one half to the other, disabled/not disabled, to see if the problems people are facing might also correlate with other factors in addition to being transgender.
It still isn't the real story here, though. There are lots of different ways in which those findings could be interrogated further to produce a more detailed picture.
Last edited:
andysays
Love and solidarity
Nigel Irritable is apparently calling everyone on this thread and elsewhere who disagrees with him not only a transphobe but a TERF as well, regardless of whether they are actually trans-exclusionary in any meaningful sense, or whether they are explicitly feminist or even whether they are actually that radical, although given that he's a longterm member of the Socialist Party, aka Committee for a Workers' International, it's perhaps understandable that he's rather inclined to such extreme dismissal of anyone who dares the slightest disagreement with his dogma, regardless of the accuracy of his characterisation.
He seemingly has a bit of an obsession
Miranda Yardley
Willing Warrior.
You seem intent on reframing everything I say as being an attack on trans people. I find this utterly bizarre.
Miranda Yardley
Willing Warrior.
We are all non-binary, as none of us are one-dimensional characters.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I thought we were all either male or female, as a question of biological fact. That seems pretty binary to me.
ETA:
I don't consider myself to be non-binary fwiw. I don't think there is any meaningful sense in which I am anything other than a man. Doesn't mean I'm somehow 'a man's man', bursting withe stereotypical manliness. Amazingly enough it is possible to reject socially constructed gender stereotypes without considering yourself to be somehow 'gender variant'. That's where it is a great pity that this chasm has been created - many gender-critical people who reject trans identity might find that their worst fears about maintaining stereotypes are not borne out among those who don't share their rejection. It is possible to be both highly critical of how gender works and trans-inclusive. Many people are.
Last edited:
bimble
floofy
Well you'd hope so.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
On the subject of transgender people working in health care- we quite often have to deal with people who may not be comfortable with either male or female carers, or a particular carer, I have also heard of a veteran with dementia who had been a POW freaking out if he heard a particular accent. I think health professionals are very used to adapting to this of situation quickly and it would likely be better to leave us to handle situations like that as they come rather than trying to direct us with some arbitrary legislation, as there's all sorts of scenarios that patients can be uncomfortable with so we kind of need the flexibility to get it right for each person. As for risk of abuse, we can't possibly rank somebody as being more likely to commit abuse on the basis of their gender orientation. I hope no one is arguing otherwise.
But I have just given up been out of the closet in that regard, you get tired of explaning yourself.
ETA: I totally agree with Mation when she said gender was something she felt, race not so much.
ETA2: What I mean to say is don't remotely see myself as being a bit male, a bit female. I am a woman. Seems binary AF to me.
There appears to be be higher rates of autism amongst the trans population so that could account for some of it, and "severe gender dysphoria" can also meet the requirements to be regarded as a disability according to disability.co.uk. It's a PDF thingy and I'm struggling to share it on this wonky tablet.
I don't think so, it was described as being "the real story" almost as if to say we should be dismissing the other grim statistics on that basis.
Well I personally have never suspected I was anything other than female, despite never conforming to gender stereotypes in the slightest. I can't speak for non binary folks but having caught flack from gay and straight people for being bi, I can only imagine what it's like for them trying to explain it to people. I have had lots of people(more so gay than straight to be honest) tell me sexuality isn't on a spectrum, I must choose. It's one of those things, if it doesn't apply to you you don't know what it is like.
But I have just given up been out of the closet in that regard, you get tired of explaning yourself.
ETA: I totally agree with Mation when she said gender was something she felt, race not so much.
ETA2: What I mean to say is don't remotely see myself as being a bit male, a bit female. I am a woman. Seems binary AF to me.
Last edited:
This is a good example of what I'm talking about. Two studies, admittedly one with a very small sample, which both show around half of trans children have attempted suicide. What purpose does undemining this claim serve? Why nitpick about self selection in the second study as if that renders the results completely invalid. Why not mention that studies in Australia and the US have found similar results? Even if these reports are a couple of percentage points out so fucking what, isn't the real story that there is a very serious problem concerning trans children's mental health?
Or perhaps the purpose in undermining these reports is that the evidence such as it is shows that kids who have treatment or who have parents who support their acquired gender do much better. This is children's lives people are gambling with, and ideology is trumping evidence.
(edited because I forgot to link to what I was talking about)
Last edited:
8ball
Decolonise colons!
That kind of renders the term obsolete, then.
bimble
floofy
Unless you are someone who seriousuly thinks that binary humans exist, people who adhere perfectly to some static stereotype of femininity / manliness, and that you are a rare flower who is not one of them, then yep.
andysays
Love and solidarity
Do you have any idea what a whiney self-centred cunt you come across as in pretty much every fucking post you make, on this and every other subject?
(that's a rhetorical question, BTW; the answer is clearly "no")
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
Fucking hell. Is that really necessary?
- Status
Similar threads
