All things Transgender related

1202123252650

Comments

  • Posts: 1,814
    mrussel1 said:
    I'm sorry, that first paragraph is meaningless.  I read it six times and I can't draw any conclusion from it.   All you're talking about is etymology.  What terms do we better need to understand the relationship until moving onto what elements?    

    Now my apologies, perhaps it's because I operate it in a financial world and we don't speak in the abstract. I worked in a heavily academic financial environment for about 10 years and it was essentially mental masturbation.  You had reams of analysts and engineers flowing through with data sets where 1. they couldn't draw concrete conclusions or 2. what they were recommending was completely unable to be operational.  I think my friend @benjs has suffered through this in his career as well.  
    Since you've tried to function as tone police a few times, I'm going to do the same for you: your inability to understand what I'm saying does not make what I'm saying meaningless. Just ask me about the parts/words you don't understand. I'm really trying to simplify things as much as I can, so help me help you. 

    Your 2nd paragraph seems to be a bit of a non sequitur, but I'm not one to pass up an opportunity: the world of finance is completely abstract. :) 

  • Posts: 1,814
    mrussel1 said:
    Zero for me.  Not once has anyone asked me about my three children like that.  If they did, I'd probably punch the old codger in the nose.  
    You'd think that might make you a little less aggressive with your own questions then, mrussel. 
  • Posts: 1,814
    I'd assume very few.  But you have to understand you'd be in the vast minority and while many would have negative connotations in asking, many also would just like to understand.  I get asked a lot of questions about a lot of things.  Specifically related to parenting choices throughout all the years. It's not uncommon or unique for people to ask questions and even judge your parenting choices.  
    Was your initial decision to raise your daughter as a daughter a conscious choice? I.e., did you sit down and ask "should we raise our child as a girl?"
  • Posts: 16,831
    ecdanc said:
    Was your initial decision to raise your daughter as a daughter a conscious choice? I.e., did you sit down and ask "should we raise our child as a girl?"
    Ummmm maybe since I wanted a girl more than anything, though certainly not in regards to marketing “girl” things. 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • Posts: 1,814
    Ummmm maybe since I wanted a girl more than anything, though certainly not in regards to marketing “girl” things. 
    Quick followup clarification, if I may. It sounds like you're saying to find out you were excited to *learn* you were having a girl, not that you decided to raise her as a girl. Is that right?
  • Posts: 16,831
    ecdanc said:
    Quick followup clarification, if I may. It sounds like you're saying to find out you were excited to *learn* you were having a girl, not that you decided to raise her as a girl. Is that right?
    Correct. But knowing the world in which I live in I was excited to raise a girl that could be everything (and to me she is and she has the potential to be amazing her whole life...I’m biased though).

    I was excited for a girl because, in my experience, they are quicker learners, develop faster and are more thoughtful. And adorable. Boys are mainly gross ;)


    hippiemom = goodness
  • Posts: 30,879
    ecdanc said:
    Since you've tried to function as tone police a few times, I'm going to do the same for you: your inability to understand what I'm saying does not make what I'm saying meaningless. Just ask me about the parts/words you don't understand. I'm really trying to simplify things as much as I can, so help me help you. 

    Your 2nd paragraph seems to be a bit of a non sequitur, but I'm not one to pass up an opportunity: the world of finance is completely abstract. :) 

    I asked the question.  I'll type it again: What terms do we better need to understand the relationship until moving onto what elements?   This is what I need to understand to understand what you are saying.  You said "We need to get the relationship of these terms figured out before we onto the other elements".  I'm asking what terms and what elements.  Make that statement again, with more detail.

    And finance is not abstract in practice. You make analytically informed decisions, weigh the risk factors, and move forward.  Otherwise you get nothing done and generate only expenses.  
  • Posts: 1,814
    Correct. But knowing the world in which I live in I was excited to raise a girl that could be everything (and to me she is and she has the potential to be amazing her whole life...I’m biased though).

    I was excited for a girl because, in my experience, they are quicker learners, develop faster and are more thoughtful. And adorable. Boys are mainly gross ;)


    I certainly am. 
  • Posts: 1,814
    mrussel1 said:
    I asked the question.  I'll type it again: What terms do we better need to understand the relationship until moving onto what elements?   This is what I need to understand to understand what you are saying.  You said "We need to get the relationship of these terms figured out before we onto the other elements".  I'm asking what terms and what elements.  Make that statement again, with more detail.

    And finance is not abstract in practice. You make analytically informed decisions, weigh the risk factors, and move forward.  Otherwise you get nothing done and generate only expenses.  
    I was trying to be polite. When I said, "we need go get the relationship of these terms figured out..." i was trying to gently say "you're entirely misunderstanding what I'm saying." Being as generous as I could with your post, I was suggesting that you might have a point about the relationship between patriarchy and gender, but you needed to back up, because your point wasn't responding to what I actually said. So, let me ask, which part of the relationship between gender and patriarchy are you struggling with? 

    I'm gonna let the other part drop, because I'm not trying to pick that fight. I'd just say: maybe try not to be so dismissive of academic thought. 
  • New Jersey Posts: 29,114
    edited January 2020
    ecdanc said:
    Quick followup clarification, if I may. It sounds like you're saying to find out you were excited to *learn* you were having a girl, not that you decided to raise her as a girl. Is that right?
    See all five of our kids we raise as boys and girls.  What they end up choosing later on in life is up to them and I will love them all no matter what.  I just don’t think the gender neutral thing benefits anyone.  Imo calling them he/she has no bearing on whether or not they are trans. If anything I would think gender neutral would confuse a kid even more. 
    Post edited by mcgruff10 on
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Posts: 1,814
    mrussel1 said:
    I asked the question.  I'll type it again: What terms do we better need to understand the relationship until moving onto what elements?   This is what I need to understand to understand what you are saying.  You said "We need to get the relationship of these terms figured out before we onto the other elements".  I'm asking what terms and what elements.  Make that statement again, with more detail.

    And finance is not abstract in practice. You make analytically informed decisions, weigh the risk factors, and move forward.  Otherwise you get nothing done and generate only expenses.  
    I will, however, try to begin helping. When I say patriarchy as a concept exceeds/diverges from the etymological origins of the word, this is what I mean: you either know or can look up the dictionary definition of patriarchy. That's not how I'm using the word. I'm using the word as a term for the specific set of gendered power relations that have been in place for, say, the last several hundred years in the "West" (shitty term, but I'm rushing). Does that help?
  • Posts: 1,814
    mcgruff10 said:
    See all five of our kids we raise as boys and girls.  What they end up choosing later on in life is up to them and I will love them all no matter what.  I just don’t think the gender neutral thing benefits anyone.  Imo calling them he/she has no bearing on whether or not they are trans. If anything I would think gender neutral would confuse a kid even more. 
    Do you not worry that if one of your kids is a transgender person they might feel pressure to adhere to the assigned gender identity you embrace for them? And that the implicit pressure they feel might produce some trauma?
  • New Jersey Posts: 29,114
    edited January 2020
    ecdanc said:
    Do you not worry that if one of your kids is a transgender person they might feel pressure to adhere to the assigned gender identity you embrace for them? And that the implicit pressure they feel might produce some trauma?
    I do not because I don’t think it matters or has any bearing on what they become. My buddy who s daughter is now a son saw plenty of signs when she was growing up. I honestly do not see any of that with my children.

    Post edited by mcgruff10 on
    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Posts: 30,879
    ecdanc said:
    I was trying to be polite. When I said, "we need go get the relationship of these terms figured out..." i was trying to gently say "you're entirely misunderstanding what I'm saying." Being as generous as I could with your post, I was suggesting that you might have a point about the relationship between patriarchy and gender, but you needed to back up, because your point wasn't responding to what I actually said. So, let me ask, which part of the relationship between gender and patriarchy are you struggling with? 

    I'm gonna let the other part drop, because I'm not trying to pick that fight. I'd just say: maybe try not to be so dismissive of academic thought. 
    You're expanding patriarchy to mean something other than its traditional meaning, going so far as saying it crosses gender.  Okay, so I'll go back to my original point, if patriarchy isn't limited to the male gender, then why make the claim that your method of child rearing could help the centuries of abuse and crimes generated by the patriarchy?  It's circular reasoning.  

    I'm not dissing academia.  I spent my fair share in post graduate schooling.  My brother is a PhD in history and we argue all the time about fascinating topics.  Although he was so fed up with that life, that he's now an IT executive at Verizon Business.   Academia is great for its environment, but in the world where you have a P&L, you kinda have to make decisions and execute.  You can't labor on the mental masturbation part.  That's my point.  
  • Posts: 16,831
    ecdanc said:
    Do you not worry that if one of your kids is a transgender person they might feel pressure to adhere to the assigned gender identity you embrace for them? And that the implicit pressure they feel might produce some trauma?
    I know you didn’t ask me, but I’ll answer for me. 

    No.

    We’ve raised our daughter around all types of people and with re-assurance on everything. Focusing on people being different and some choices they make are up to them (if there is a choice to be made) and other times it’s just people figuring out who they really are. I have no fear that if she confronts something like that, she will not have any issues from us. Sure, there will be pressure in her world, but she’s have support. I will say, now that she’s 12 (and really from a much younger age) it was pretty easy to see she was being her full self and wasn’t going to have any of these questions or doubts.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • Toronto, ON Posts: 9,367
    ecdanc said:
    Since you've tried to function as tone police a few times, I'm going to do the same for you: your inability to understand what I'm saying does not make what I'm saying meaningless. Just ask me about the parts/words you don't understand. I'm really trying to simplify things as much as I can, so help me help you. 

    Your 2nd paragraph seems to be a bit of a non sequitur, but I'm not one to pass up an opportunity: the world of finance is completely abstract. :) 

    First, as the financial analyst on here has already stated - no, the financial world does not operate in abstracts. If you don't effectively mitigate financial risk, make decisions logically, show tangible results, you do not reap financial benefit, nor climb in that world. That's almost the exact opposite of "completely abstract". I could tell you this just from contact with financial advisors throughout my not-yet-30 years on this planet. 

    Next, your statement very clearly reads that the existence of genders is the catalyst to an exploitable power dynamic where men receive the advantage. I might agree with you if we didn't see so many non-gender patterns of people organizing themselves into groups, one group recognizing a unique advantage and exploiting the situation, and disregarding those who are poised to be in a losing position. Religion. Politics. Nationalism. 

    If we are universally opposed to divisions, it's time to stop talking about categories of division, and instead commit to actively embrace differences - the universal catalyst to reparations between fractured societies. Until our attitude surrounding those who differ from us becomes a positive one instead of a negative one, this divide won't heal, at best it just won't worsen.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • Posts: 30,879
    benjs said:
    First, as the financial analyst on here has already stated - no, the financial world does not operate in abstracts. If you don't effectively mitigate financial risk, make decisions logically, show tangible results, you do not reap financial benefit, nor climb in that world. That's almost the exact opposite of "completely abstract". I could tell you this just from contact with financial advisors throughout my not-yet-30 years on this planet. 

    Next, your statement very clearly reads that the existence of genders is the catalyst to an exploitable power dynamic where men receive the advantage. I might agree with you if we didn't see so many non-gender patterns of people organizing themselves into groups, one group recognizing a unique advantage and exploiting the situation, and disregarding those who are poised to be in a losing position. Religion. Politics. Nationalism. 

    If we are universally opposed to divisions, it's time to stop talking about categories of division, and instead commit to actively embrace differences - the universal catalyst to reparations between fractured societies. Until our attitude surrounding those who differ from us becomes a positive one instead of a negative one, this divide won't heal, at best it just won't worsen.
    See this is why I love Ben.  He just brought a great argument and came from a different angle from where I was.  The last paragraph is a winner.  We are just creating more subgroups, getting further away from e pluribus unum.  
  • Toronto, ON Posts: 9,367
    ecdanc said:
    I was trying to be polite. When I said, "we need go get the relationship of these terms figured out..." i was trying to gently say "you're entirely misunderstanding what I'm saying." Being as generous as I could with your post, I was suggesting that you might have a point about the relationship between patriarchy and gender, but you needed to back up, because your point wasn't responding to what I actually said. So, let me ask, which part of the relationship between gender and patriarchy are you struggling with? 

    I'm gonna let the other part drop, because I'm not trying to pick that fight. I'd just say: maybe try not to be so dismissive of academic thought. 
    You were unclear in the way you phrased your argument, threw in unnecessary prose, bastardized the definition of patriarchy to a non-dictionary definition that only you would know, made inaccurate claims about finance to a financial advisor, and then criticized said person of being dismissive of academic thought. In my experience in academia (Bachelor's in Structural Engineering), we debated based on a foundation of established facts and evidence. Have they changed that since I left?
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • New Jersey Posts: 29,114
    mrussel1 said:
    See this is why I love Ben.  He just brought a great argument and came from a different angle from where I was.  The last paragraph is a winner.  We are just creating more subgroups, getting further away from e pluribus unum.  
    Ben is weak. Dude can’t even go to Quebec City to see pj.  

    I'll ride the wave where it takes me......
  • Toronto, ON Posts: 9,367
    mcgruff10 said:
    Ben is weak. Dude can’t even go to Quebec City to see pj.  

    Low blow, I so wish I could! heading on vacation with my family on the 24th and didn't want to get greedy :) 
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.