All things Transgender related

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

ecdanc said:

cincybearcat said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

PC Principal is going to stifle discussion on this topic, so i'm out.

Honestly I would love to have some open discussions on this.  I feel like a supporter, but I know there are parts of the issue I do not understand and likely do not talk about correctly.  I always find it disheartening when people trying to get people to understand thinks they already should understand 100%.  

Do you really want to understand? I literally JUST explained to you why his comments troubled me. I did not blast him at all; I corrected him. I'm happy to explain in more detail why what he said is problematic, but I don't think you want to hear. 

I don't need you to help me on that one I got it.  He called the women his daughter.  You nitpicked a sentence where he wasn't saying what you think he was saying.  You aren't a help in this discussion it seems.

See, this is the thing: your default position is "I already know this." That's not the sign of someone who wants to learn. 

At the risk of beating a dead horse (a VERY dead horse at this point), "open discussions" are very difficult to have until we can at very least stop framing things in ways that--unintentional as it may be--belittle the marginalized group under discussion. Without reaching that point, we're asking the marginalized group to perpetually "be the bigger person," as they try to educate others about things that are often academic exercises to the purported learners, while being daily struggles for the teachers. 

unfortunately until we know the ins and outs, we are not always cognizant that we are belittling anything. I personally don't like teachers that are this arrogant. I like people to just say "you know, that's not the preferred term, this is and here's why", instead of "stop saying that, BIGOT". 

The only time I called someone a bigot (for which I apologized), is when the person was being intentionally provocative. 

fair enough, maybe not that harsh, but you come off quite abrasively even when people are trying to be respectful. I saw nothing wrong with how meltdown said it. if it is wrong, fine, respectfully correct. 

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

this reminds me a lot of having an honest conversation with someone who is a devout christian. many times, you ask a simple question, they get all offended thinking you are making fun of them, when all you want is a straight answer. it's irritating and turns people off from wanting to be an ally or even just understanding their position. 

See, the framing here is a little worrisome to me. The only thing to "understand" about transgender people/identity/rights is how not to dehumanize them, how to ensure their rights, how to support them. Anything beyond that is not a genuine effort to understand--it's an entree to judge and diminish. This isn't some anthropological exercise; it's real people facing real shit. So, frankly, being irritated and turned off probably says more about the learner than the teacher (in those instances). 

yes, but as someone who isn't trans, I don't personally know that saying they "were a man" or "used to be a woman" is in any way dehumanizing. seriously, coming from an ignorant place, how the fuck would anyone know that's dehumanizing until we're told? it sounds factual to me. now, if someone were to tell me, "trans people don't identify is being a woman in a prior life because they always felt like a man inside", then I'm "oh, ok, I didn't realize that, I wont' say that again". 

is it really that difficult to have that type of conversation instead of coming from a place of moral superiority?

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

this reminds me a lot of having an honest conversation with someone who is a devout christian. many times, you ask a simple question, they get all offended thinking you are making fun of them, when all you want is a straight answer. it's irritating and turns people off from wanting to be an ally or even just understanding their position. 

See, the framing here is a little worrisome to me. The only thing to "understand" about transgender people/identity/rights is how not to dehumanize them, how to ensure their rights, how to support them. Anything beyond that is not a genuine effort to understand--it's an entree to judge and diminish. This isn't some anthropological exercise; it's real people facing real shit. So, frankly, being irritated and turned off probably says more about the learner than the teacher (in those instances). 

yes, but as someone who isn't trans, I don't personally know that saying they "were a man" or "used to be a woman" is in any way dehumanizing. seriously, coming from an ignorant place, how the fuck would anyone know that's dehumanizing until we're told? it sounds factual to me. now, if someone were to tell me, "trans people don't identify is being a woman in a prior life because they always felt like a man inside", then I'm "oh, ok, I didn't realize that, I wont' say that again". 

is it really that difficult to have that type of conversation instead of coming from a place of moral superiority?

I get where you're coming from and, again...my tone isn't always great...but what you're describing is ignorance. I don't mean that in an insulting way, but in the literal dictionary definition. Basically all marginalized people bear the brunt of others' lack of knowledge all the damn time. So, it's a tricky thing: whose responsibility is it to educate others about trans people? 

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

this reminds me a lot of having an honest conversation with someone who is a devout christian. many times, you ask a simple question, they get all offended thinking you are making fun of them, when all you want is a straight answer. it's irritating and turns people off from wanting to be an ally or even just understanding their position. 

See, the framing here is a little worrisome to me. The only thing to "understand" about transgender people/identity/rights is how not to dehumanize them, how to ensure their rights, how to support them. Anything beyond that is not a genuine effort to understand--it's an entree to judge and diminish. This isn't some anthropological exercise; it's real people facing real shit. So, frankly, being irritated and turned off probably says more about the learner than the teacher (in those instances). 

yes, but as someone who isn't trans, I don't personally know that saying they "were a man" or "used to be a woman" is in any way dehumanizing. seriously, coming from an ignorant place, how the fuck would anyone know that's dehumanizing until we're told? it sounds factual to me. now, if someone were to tell me, "trans people don't identify is being a woman in a prior life because they always felt like a man inside", then I'm "oh, ok, I didn't realize that, I wont' say that again". 

is it really that difficult to have that type of conversation instead of coming from a place of moral superiority?

I get where you're coming from and, again...my tone isn't always great...but what you're describing is ignorance. I don't mean that in an insulting way, but in the literal dictionary definition. Basically all marginalized people bear the brunt of others' lack of knowledge all the damn time. So, it's a tricky thing: whose responsibility is it to educate others about trans people? 

I didn't just describe it as ignorance. I damn well said the word. I fully acknowledge when I'm ignorant on a subject, and this is one of those subjects. 

it's the trans community's responsibility to educate others. and if you wish to present yourself as an advocate, also yours.

it's my responsibility as a decent person to listen. 

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

this reminds me a lot of having an honest conversation with someone who is a devout christian. many times, you ask a simple question, they get all offended thinking you are making fun of them, when all you want is a straight answer. it's irritating and turns people off from wanting to be an ally or even just understanding their position. 

See, the framing here is a little worrisome to me. The only thing to "understand" about transgender people/identity/rights is how not to dehumanize them, how to ensure their rights, how to support them. Anything beyond that is not a genuine effort to understand--it's an entree to judge and diminish. This isn't some anthropological exercise; it's real people facing real shit. So, frankly, being irritated and turned off probably says more about the learner than the teacher (in those instances). 

yes, but as someone who isn't trans, I don't personally know that saying they "were a man" or "used to be a woman" is in any way dehumanizing. seriously, coming from an ignorant place, how the fuck would anyone know that's dehumanizing until we're told? it sounds factual to me. now, if someone were to tell me, "trans people don't identify is being a woman in a prior life because they always felt like a man inside", then I'm "oh, ok, I didn't realize that, I wont' say that again". 

is it really that difficult to have that type of conversation instead of coming from a place of moral superiority?

I get where you're coming from and, again...my tone isn't always great...but what you're describing is ignorance. I don't mean that in an insulting way, but in the literal dictionary definition. Basically all marginalized people bear the brunt of others' lack of knowledge all the damn time. So, it's a tricky thing: whose responsibility is it to educate others about trans people? 

I didn't just describe it as ignorance. I damn well said the word. I fully acknowledge when I'm ignorant on a subject, and this is one of those subjects. 

it's the trans community's responsibility to educate others. and if you wish to present yourself as an advocate, also yours.

it's my responsibility as a decent person to listen. 

See, this is where we disagree. Why do you think it is their responsibility to correct your ignorance?

Because they represent .6% of the population, so most of us have little to no interaction.  How are we to learn?

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

mrussel1 said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

ecdanc said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

this reminds me a lot of having an honest conversation with someone who is a devout christian. many times, you ask a simple question, they get all offended thinking you are making fun of them, when all you want is a straight answer. it's irritating and turns people off from wanting to be an ally or even just understanding their position. 

See, the framing here is a little worrisome to me. The only thing to "understand" about transgender people/identity/rights is how not to dehumanize them, how to ensure their rights, how to support them. Anything beyond that is not a genuine effort to understand--it's an entree to judge and diminish. This isn't some anthropological exercise; it's real people facing real shit. So, frankly, being irritated and turned off probably says more about the learner than the teacher (in those instances). 

yes, but as someone who isn't trans, I don't personally know that saying they "were a man" or "used to be a woman" is in any way dehumanizing. seriously, coming from an ignorant place, how the fuck would anyone know that's dehumanizing until we're told? it sounds factual to me. now, if someone were to tell me, "trans people don't identify is being a woman in a prior life because they always felt like a man inside", then I'm "oh, ok, I didn't realize that, I wont' say that again". 

is it really that difficult to have that type of conversation instead of coming from a place of moral superiority?

I get where you're coming from and, again...my tone isn't always great...but what you're describing is ignorance. I don't mean that in an insulting way, but in the literal dictionary definition. Basically all marginalized people bear the brunt of others' lack of knowledge all the damn time. So, it's a tricky thing: whose responsibility is it to educate others about trans people? 

I didn't just describe it as ignorance. I damn well said the word. I fully acknowledge when I'm ignorant on a subject, and this is one of those subjects. 

it's the trans community's responsibility to educate others. and if you wish to present yourself as an advocate, also yours.

it's my responsibility as a decent person to listen. 

See, this is where we disagree. Why do you think it is their responsibility to correct your ignorance?

Because they represent .6% of the population, so most of us have little to no interaction.  How are we to learn?

Read? I mean, hell, I don't have interaction with Ernest Hemingway, but I still know a shit-ton about him. 

Umm.. that's a dumb argument.  Give it another shot.