Why do some feminists hate transgender people?
- Thread starter D'wards
- Start date
toggle
wobbly
i thought the study was interesting. and i am glad that she put that up.
i'm also not supprised, going by past discussion that she's asked people not to lay into her over it.
clearly, and unfortunately, such requests are still appearing to be necessary
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
afaics it is what she sees as the insubstantial nature of your argument with which AuntiStella is taking issue, so unless you've something more weighty to post maybe you should leave it.
the thread was bumped specifically to have a go at thora. Can't really expect her not to respond tbf.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
always accusations against trans women - how convenient that we have male bodies is the charge. We MUST be lying. We MUST be angling to get something. What is our devious motivation? I'm in no mood to take this bullshit. I will not discuss my gender identity either - any more than someone who is LGB would allow their sexuality to be questioned.
Fuck you!! Cis privilege!
Fuck you!! Cis privilege!
toggle
wobbly
If someone was throwing about attitude like this in a thread that you deemed feminist, you'd be right in there telling them to stfu.
why is it wrong to tone police cis women but not trans women?
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
I was actually responding to something she had said - but chiefly I wanted to say something about that study. I think I have that right. But no-one can make me discuss my gender identity either. And abuse hurled at me for my gender identity is not a discussion. She said nothing that challenged what i said in any valid way, and neither have you.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
how dare anyone challenge your dogma you mean.
Sea Star
have you ever explored your dark side?
But without hesitation you back up anyone who does.
toggle
wobbly
just a problem that she can find discussion of it triggering
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I think you've misunderstood the study, tbh. Having defined 'male/female' in such a nebulous, non-functional way, that 6 percent is then very low, and the 2.4 % among younger people even more so, and suggests that there may well be something else entirely going on to explain the differences. It says absolutely nothing about what those so-called gendered bits of the brain are actually doing, what differences they suggest in terms of brain function, and also, crucially, how the brains developed like that - what environmental factors have resulted in those brain differences.
tbh my extremely tentative suggestion regarding these findings, especially the finding of less 'genderisation' among younger people, would be that this has nothing to do with your gender at birth and everything to do with how you're brought up.
This isn't intended as an attack on trans people, btw, but you're reaching conclusions here that I don't see as merited in any way at all. Your lived experience is surely your strongest argument, and remains so whatever brain imaging might say.
Last edited:
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
Gromit
International Man of Misery
She was refuting / disputing / interpreting / whatever scientific studies.
Great, good. She's entitled to her opinion and welcome to it.
But surely we are entitled to call her up on it when she includes 'Fallacious arguments.'
A List Of Fallacious Arguments
Such as:
Appeal to authority - I'm trans so I'm right and your all phobic if you disagree with my arguments
Appeal to pity - I get so upset by all this I show visible signs of distress.
Surely we can call bullshit if someone joins an argument and say this is what I think but it's not up for debate because I say so, with an oh so convenient because it upsets me.
If you truly believe in a viewpoint have the conviction to defend it if you think it's that important to state it.
A moderator disagrees because I've been given a warning. Which is ridiculous imo.
Gromit
International Man of Misery
As to my view on the studies etc.
I've heard it argued so many times on this board that gender behaviour is 100% nurture and fuck all to do with nature.
I've never believed that.
I think genetically it's a slightly random sliding scale (usually weighted more one way or the other) and that nurture can slide that scale further one way or the other.
I've heard it argued so many times on this board that gender behaviour is 100% nurture and fuck all to do with nature.
I've never believed that.
I think genetically it's a slightly random sliding scale (usually weighted more one way or the other) and that nurture can slide that scale further one way or the other.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
tbh this sentence suggests to me that you don't understand the way nurture interplays with genes.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
So people aren't allow to challenge what her assertions? Look I appreciate AS finds this issue very personal but I don't think that means that people shouldn't be allowed to challenge what she says. Clearly they should respond sensitively but the idea that they can't respond at all is just nonsense.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
You were given a warning because you accused somebody who posts that they are distressed by particular lines of argument that affect them personally of "acting like a drama queen". It is perfectly possible to disagree and criticise someone's approach without doing this sort of thing.
Gromit
International Man of Misery
The way I see it nature can and does assign gender roles and behaviours.
Look at lions for instance. The females are the hunters. Are people going to tell me that's because of centuries of social pressure and Lion Cosmo telling them they should be the hunters?
The thing about humans though is that we are more adaptable and can overwrite, rewrite, amend our genetic programming. People seem to think that this therefore means because we can override the original programs don't exist.
Like believing a video tape was never one of a thousand copies of Fight Club because it now has a copy of the Sound of Music on it.
Gromit
International Man of Misery
Drama queen. A definition from Websters: a person given to often excessively emotional performances or reactions.
That visibly shaking reference was an excessive emotional performance and had nothing whatsoever to do with the validity of the argument.
It's perfectly possible to post without doing that sort of thing.
I've been called a fuck lot worse many times. I've never seen you worry about that.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
We have very plastic brains throughout our lives - but it's not helpful to think of that as 'amending our genetic programming'. Rather, it is part of our genetic programming.
co-op
But....but cLoWnFiSh....
And yet it was you who linked to the ?transphobic? study that led to AS claiming triggering. What's your responsibility here? Don't you owe an apology to AS?
toggle
wobbly
so you were born to play the muppet?
trashpony
Hag
I think that's fair enough. I also think it's fair enough to be able to question those lines of argument without being accused of being triggering which is a way of shutting discussion down. Triggering is something that affects someone suffering from PTSD. It doesn't mean 'I don't like what you're saying and it upsets me so you shouldn't say it'.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Oh come on, if you can't see the difference between FM posting a link to a to study questioning brain dimorphism and a well know misogynistic poster calling a trans woman a drama queen then you're as much of a dick as Gromit.
Last edited:
Gromit
International Man of Misery
Nothing misogynistic about it. The fact they are trans or a woman is also irrelevant. Act like a drama queen and I'll call you a bloody drama queen too.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
To be fair, he's the very opposite of a drama queen, whatever that is. An insipid peasant maybe.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
People get upset/disturbed discussing some things they care about. So fucking what, you smug cunt?
Similar threads
