Two Questions for Transgender people

originally posted by: Bayne

originally posted by: AlongCamePaul
a reply to: Darth_Prime

Sexuality is a metal state... The physical reality of things is they were born a certain way, and although due to science we have been able to change the physical nature of things, there still exists on a chromosomal level the truth of the situation. Therefore claiming to be anything other than what you are born is a form of deception no matter what you felt you were or what you feel you are.

I do believe I have accurately described the difference between sexuality and gender. Thanks Darth.

Firstly actually FMRI scans have found cross-sex neurology in many Gay and Lesbian Brains.. which means sexuality and gender are linked but not the way many think, instead it suggests many gays and lesbians are a kind of Trans, not Trans a kind of Gay or Lesbian.

As for Chromosomes no chromosomes are not 'truth', they are guidelines really. For example a person may have XY chromosomes but Androgen Insensitivity, so despite that Y instead of a second X the person's body might develop female anyway either partially from PAIS (partial androgen insensitivity syndrome)or totally with CAIS (complete androgen insensitivity syndrome).

People are raised on a very simplified version of the biological reality these days, and school science is pretty weak alas so it's easier for people to pass subjects. But the reality is that biology has a lot more blurred lines than people have been generally aware of. And for fairness to exist the crucial absences of peoples knowledge need to be filled in. If there has been a deception it was in people being taught that XX always = female and XY always = male and never taught about XXY or XYY or PAIS or CAIS or Transgender etcetera.

Thank you for laying out the science in this thread. A lot of people have no idea there are scientific. biological reasons we exist and that that scientific, biological evidence supports who and what we say we are.

a reply to: Bayne

Cis woman, Trans woman, both sub-categories of Woman. And if you see a woman and assume they are Cis and not Trans, and they happen to be Trans, well then you made a mistake of assuming all Women are Cis women. But the Trans woman is still a Woman, just from the other sub-category. Intersex woman is also a sub-category of woman too.

OK for the most part I agree with this. Where we disagree is that it's on the transgender person to identify themselves. The reason I think they need to, is because while many hold negative feelings about sleeping with a transgender person, most aren't aware that they can actually still be passable if they take of their clothes.

Now I agree that this isn't ideal for anyone. The problem is it's going to take awhile for the general populace to realize that if they have a problem they should be asking. Transgendered people are aware that many have a problem, they are aware of what they are, and therefore the onus is on them to disclose.

It's really hard to draw parallels with other situations without making the trans person feel attacked. Saying things about venereal diseases implies being transgendered is somehow bad or harmful. I don't think it's either.

If we both acknowledge that a transgender person is a different subset, can we acknowledge that not everyone is going to be into people that fall into that category sexually? Can we also acknowledge that there is a ton of misinformation to go along with the general dearth of information surrounding transgender individuals in our society? Shouldn't the feelings of those that aren't into having intercourse with a transgender individual be taken into account also? Can we acknowledge that not wanting to sleep with a transgender person does not mean that someone actually knows that it's impossible to tell the difference without a blood test? Can we then say that since the transgendered person has the knowledge, and is aware of these issues in society, they should inform potential sex partners who would be uncomfortable with full disclosure?

originally posted by: Kojiro
a reply to: AlongCamePaul

A deformity at birth does not define us, our minds do.

I have heard this argument before. Do you really look at us men as deformed humans?

a reply to: pompel9

So no, they don't.

Legit transgender people have brains that are wired differently. So they are the opposite mentally than what their body would suggest. It's an actual thing, even though it sounds like nonsense when you first learn about it.

So you know how someone can have a mental disorder, this is essentially having a body disorder. A transgender person is going to have brain structure and chemistry that is more inline with the opposite of what their body suggests. So a woman's brain in the body of a man (for simplicity, that's not quite how it works).

So they get a real bad deal. They feel like and think like and in many ways are just a woman, but their brain is in the body of a man. Even imagining that freaks me out. Now imagine that society and whatnot doesn't accept them, and thinks they're faking it for attention or sexual preference. It's not sexual preference, and science suggests that this is a real phenomena.

So sexual orientation (straight or gay or whatever) is not tied to being transgender. You can be transgender and be attracted to the sex you identify with (the one that your brain says you are not your body) or the opposite. It's confusing, and there should be a flowchart. Tansgender means your bod and your brain don't match.

Now I think that there is an alarming number of transgender and people that don't class themselves as cisgender (cisgender means born with a penis, identify as a man, or born with a vagina, identify as a woman, basically normal) that believe cisgender people are bad because we have an easier time at life. They are jackasses, and shouldn't be listened to. They want to have a pity party, and are trying to elevate themselves for not having certain advantages (which is an advantage and completely hypocritical).

TL;DR Only the asshole transgender people think that men born as men and identifying as men are automatically less than. I would caution people that the "supporters" in this thread probably don't align with the feelings of the majority of trans* people, and that most trans* people are awesome and understanding and would inform potential sex partners of their status.

originally posted by: pompel9

originally posted by: Kojiro
a reply to: AlongCamePaul

A deformity at birth does not define us, our minds do.

I have heard this argument before. Do you really look at us men as deformed humans?

No but if you were born with a female brain in that body then you'd see it as deformed for *you* and only you.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: pompel9

originally posted by: Kojiro
a reply to: AlongCamePaul

A deformity at birth does not define us, our minds do.

I have heard this argument before. Do you really look at us men as deformed humans?

No but if you were born with a female brain in that body then you'd see it as deformed for *you* and only you.

That was not what I was asking.

It is clearly stated that being born as a man is some kind of deformity. Here is the quote again: A deformity at birth does not define us, our minds do.

So, do you Kojiro look at men as some kind of deformed human being?

It's seems that you do not think so, but I wasn't asking you nor Domo1 (sorry for not answering your post, but I found you reply confusing to say the least). I was asking Kojiro, that made that statement.
No offense intended.

a reply to: pompel9

No. I'm saying that I was born deformed. My mind does not match what I was born with. This tactic of attempting to put words in my mouth is extremely poor.

originally posted by: pompel9

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: pompel9

originally posted by: Kojiro
a reply to: AlongCamePaul

A deformity at birth does not define us, our minds do.

I have heard this argument before. Do you really look at us men as deformed humans?

No but if you were born with a female brain in that body then you'd see it as deformed for *you* and only you.

That was not what I was asking.

It is clearly stated that being born as a man is some kind of deformity. Here is the quote again: A deformity at birth does not define us, our minds do.

So, do you Kojiro look at men as some kind of deformed human being?

The deformity which Kojiro is referring to is one which resulted in she being born transgender. That says nothing about men being considered deformed. It just means from her perspective, with her female brain, being born in a body which does not matches is a deformity.

Let's turn it around.

Suppose tomorrow you woke up with breasts and a vagina. Would you view your body as being as you felt that it should be? Would you miss anything?

How you answer those questions would have nothing to do with my next question which is: Would you then view women as being somehow deformed?

It's seems that you do not think so,

I don't. I love my father, I love my male relatives, I love my boyfriend. I do not see them as deformed. But if one of my older sisters had been born like me then yes I would feel she got a very bad deal at birth.

but I wasn't asking you nor Domo1 (sorry for not answering your post, but I found you reply confusing to say the least). I was asking Kojiro, that made that statement.
No offense intended.

I'm sure Kojiro will clarify what she meant but knowing what I know about her from our conversations here and offline, that is not what she meant.

originally posted by: Kojiro
a reply to: pompel9

No. I'm saying that I was born deformed. My mind does not match what I was born with. This tactic of attempting to put words in my mouth is extremely poor.

Exactly.

originally posted by: AlongCamePaul
It should be a federal offense to have sex with someone and not tell them you are a trans gender. Much like it is to have sex with someone and not tell them you are HIV positive.

It is a moral issue which should be corrected by the government.

I have no quarrel with the LGBT community. I Believe people should do what makes them happy. However when what makes you happy could in some way lead to anothes detriment then there needs to be a check and balance to ensure the general security of people.

I actually thought of an interesting Idea where during a trans gender operation they get a manditory tattoo near their genitals to let people know "hey I had an operation".

Then again some would say branding a person who underwent gender reassignment is unethical.

Considering that the last few times in history which took place when one form of human decided to dehumanize another form of human through the use of branding involved 1) Them being loaded into ships like cattle where many of them died on the journey, 2) Keeping them from running away from a life of slavery after they or their family survived #1 or 3) Them being loaded in to gas chambers......... I think the understatement of the year would be to say that your idea is a very bad one.

Sorry Mini-Hitler but the problem lay within yourself.

k thx

PS: This thread was dead until you revived it. I suggest you read it from start to the point at which you posted because most of this stuff has already been discussed.

a reply to: JadeStar

Glad to help
I'll watch the video shortly and am glad to hear of this progress in the Astronomy community! Very cool.

a reply to: Domo1

No the onus must be on the Cis person who would be uncomfortable because of the danger to the Trans person. Discomfort vs Danger. As i said even if we were to find out people who found they once slept with a Trans person were suicidal it'd need to be a huge number to justify the known danger.

I don't see how anyone in this day and age could have avoided the transphobic memes of 'it's a Trap' and 'You slept with a tranny' etc when i's been a joke in a Tom hanks movie over a generation old and still in dvd stores (i saw it in the shelf the day before yesterday) as well as the Crying Game, a feature point in the 2nd Hangover movie let alone shows like There's Something About Miriam or the huge amount of Anime has crossdressing and/or androgynous characters. And every time Trans people are in the news or celebrity magaxines or tv shows that awareness increases. We have openly Transgender supermodels like Andrea Pejic being voted amongst the worlds sexiest women. No-one lives in ignorance of the existence of Transgender anymore. By now any cisgender male who does not know about this subject at least from a transphobic perspective would have to have been raised by wolves.

Remember as i said only a very small amount of Trans people get surgery and are 100% passable. It's increasing as more are able to transition as children and get surgery after their teens but it's still a small fraction of 1% of the population. The Intersex population is larger than that. So a man has a greater chance of finding out they themselves are biologically part-woman and they never knew than they do of accidentally sleeping with a post-op transsexual who didn't disclose it.

Most Transgender people are non-binary, don't pass most of the time, don't get the surgery and do inform prospective partners. So this is really a non-issue.

What is far far more common than that non-issue is Cisgender men and women who are attracted to Transgender people because they are Transgender but who do not feel they can admit it or openly date an openly Transgender person without discrimination from their peers. If they repress this desire and develop self-hate issues over it they are likely to be amongst (the majority of) people who make Transphobic remarks or commit acts of violence against Transgender people. Even if they keep this sexual orientation in the closet this does psychological harm to them just like closeted bisexuals and homosexuals have experienced over the decades.

As they are the majority of the people who make it safer for Transgender people to be in the closet/stealth it is ending the prejudice against them that is crucial before it can ever be reasonable to expect Transgender people to declare that they are Transgender. And that's completely in the hands of Cisgender people as it's Cisgender Vs Cisgender violence and social oppression.

Humanity used to be pro-Transgender and Transgender people were part of everyday life, in some places this was less than 200 years ago and some it was even within living memory. Some Cisgender people changed that and the rest of Cisgender people allowed it to occur. The entirety of the issue is the responsibility of Cisgender people. The ignorance of some Cisgender people about aspects of this is also entirely the fault of Cisgender people. Any suffering on the part of Cisgender people from fixing this exists because other Cisgender people made the present situation this way.

originally posted by: Bayne
a reply to: Domo1

No the onus must be on the Cis person who would be uncomfortable because of the danger to the Trans person. Discomfort vs Danger. As i said even if we were to find out people who found they once slept with a Trans person were suicidal it'd need to be a huge number to justify the known danger.

I don't see how anyone in this day and age could have avoided the transphobic memes of 'it's a Trap' and 'You slept with a tranny' etc when i's been a joke in a Tom hanks movie over a generation old and still in dvd stores (i saw it in the shelf the day before yesterday) as well as the Crying Game, a feature point in the 2nd Hangover movie let alone shows like There's Something About Miriam or the huge amount of Anime has crossdressing and/or androgynous characters. And every time Trans people are in the news or celebrity magaxines or tv shows that awareness increases. We have openly Transgender supermodels like Andrea Pejic being voted amongst the worlds sexiest women. No-one lives in ignorance of the existence of Transgender anymore. By now any cisgender male who does not know about this subject at least from a transphobic perspective would have to have been raised by wolves.

Agreed.

Here's a question....

While I hate the radioactive t-word (trannie/tranny,etc) is it wrong that I think the whole "It's a trap." meme is something kinda cute and something which the community could turn into a positive???? It doesn't sound derogatory in the same way as tranny because trap is basically saying we are cis-normative.

Because at least to me, I wasn't nearly as offended in high school when someone called me a "trap". To me that just meant that there's no way any one ever would have known I had been born different so these people had to "warn" people (mostly boys) about me.

So like one time, this girl told this guy who had transferred in from another school about my difference when he was eyeing me from across and down the hallway near my locker. She did this by declaring loudly: "Dude stop looking at her, she's a trap!"

Idk why but I just started giggling and he smiled. I didn't get angry or feel sad like when I got called the aforementioned "t-word". I just kinda took it as "Oh, she likes him and he's ignoring her and looking at me so she sees me as a threat, and I kinda like that."

He walked by me slowly after that and said quietly "Looking good, trap."

Again I didn't feel horrible. I could tell he wasn't being mean but kinda giving me a compliment and this made me feel cute and attractive despite my difference.

(I probably would have felt worse if she had said "it's a trap!" rather than "she's a trap".)

I know it's politically incorrect but what do you think? Could the word "trap" be reclaimed?

BTW: Following that incident, I thought of being my own one girl revolution. I gave serious thought about getting a black t-shirt made with "TRAP" written on the chest in silver sparkles and proudly wearing it to school but i (probably wisely) decided not to.

originally posted by: Bayne
a reply to: Domo1

Humanity used to be pro-Transgender and Transgender people were part of everyday life, in some places this was less than 200 years ago and some it was even within living memory.

And I've heard still is in Thailand.

Some Cisgender people changed that and the rest of Cisgender people allowed it to occur. The entirety of the issue is the responsibility of Cisgender people. The ignorance of some Cisgender people about aspects of this is also entirely the fault of Cisgender people. Any suffering on the part of Cisgender people from fixing this exists because other Cisgender people made the present situation this way.

Agreed.

a reply to: JadeStar

Trap has been reclaimed. I've seen plenty of other transgendered women use it on the Net. Just like the other word has been reclaimed. I've been called so many names in life, that if trap was directed at me, it would just roll off my back at this point.

a reply to: JadeStar

If you were going to get a t-shirt made, you would have to go full Admiral Ackbar on it, surely?

Personally speaking, I do not get the idea of referring to a person by the identification of their differences. I do not casually refer to gay friends of mine by saying "Hey there, Man Lover, how's tricks?", or to a lesbian chum of mine by saying "No snorkel or flippers today? The diving business must be slow!". It's not the done thing. Why is it that people cannot just refer to one another by name? Why is it, that people seem to think that referring to a person by way of their differences is appropriate?

Just be, and let people be. Show respect. That has always seemed a much better way to approach the world, than to just point fingers and verbally defecate on everyone thoughtlessly.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: JadeStar

If you were going to get a t-shirt made, you would have to go full Admiral Ackbar on it, surely?

Oh yes! I don't know, it could be a cottage industry. Could pay for my textbooks maybe? Cafepress here I come...

Just kidding.

Personally speaking, I do not get the idea of referring to a person by the identification of their differences. I do not casually refer to gay friends of mine by saying "Hey there, Man Lover, how's tricks?", or to a lesbian chum of mine by saying "No snorkel or flippers today? The diving business must be slow!". It's not the done thing. Why is it that people cannot just refer to one another by name? Why is it, that people seem to think that referring to a person by way of their differences is appropriate?

I agree. You really are a great guy TrueBrit.

Just be, and let people be. Show respect. That has always seemed a much better way to approach the world, than to just point fingers and verbally defecate on everyone thoughtlessly.

That's how I was raised. I can tolerate differences in opinion. What I can't tolerate are attempts to invalidate, dehumanize, ostracize, marginalize, demonize or brand people because of something they had no control over like ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, national origin, mental or physical disability.

a reply to: JadeStar

Exactly.

The way I see it, I am me. My issues, my tastes, musical preferences, interests, do not define me. Sure, I am obviously a metalhead, but even that is simply a declaration of my musical tastes. What I really am is a person. Similarly, people who are different than me are not identifiable by whatever demographic metrics they might fall into. It would be inaccurate, for example, to refer to you as simply being "that trans girl from ATS", any more than it would be accurate to describe you as "that woman who likes telescopes".

For a start, both of those tags are distinctly ambiguous, because both of them could be applied to more people than just you. They generalise, and de-personalise by their very definition. You are JadeStar. You are an entity with thoughts, desires, dreams and ambitions, and like all of us living here on this world, you have complexities which place you beyond the capacity of a linguistic crutch, to properly and efficiently encompass. Your name however calls to mind ALL that one knows of you. A gentleman called John Green, an author, believes that many of the problems in the world are caused by a refusal of some people to imagine others complexly. I happen to agree with that, and seek in all things, to oppose that trend.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: JadeStar

Exactly.

The way I see it, I am me. My issues, my tastes, musical preferences, interests, do not define me. Sure, I am obviously a metalhead, but even that is simply a declaration of my musical tastes. What I really am is a person. Similarly, people who are different than me are not identifiable by whatever demographic metrics they might fall into. It would be inaccurate, for example, to refer to you as simply being "that trans girl from ATS", any more than it would be accurate to describe you as "that woman who likes telescopes".

For a start, both of those tags are distinctly ambiguous, because both of them could be applied to more people than just you. They generalise, and de-personalise by their very definition. You are JadeStar. You are an entity with thoughts, desires, dreams and ambitions, and like all of us living here on this world, you have complexities which place you beyond the capacity of a linguistic crutch, to properly and efficiently encompass. Your name however calls to mind ALL that one knows of you. A gentleman called John Green, an author, believes that many of the problems in the world are caused by a refusal of some people to imagine others complexly. I happen to agree with that, and seek in all things, to oppose that trend.

Agreed, and this is my major problem with MSM and television in general. They really do perpetuate the whole "inability to imagine people complexly" thing by pushing harrowingly flat narratives across entire groups of (mostly marginalized) people. I don't know if its some deep conspiracy or blind capitalism (believing that putting an "other" in a dynamic and uplifting role won't sell tickets), but it's a real problem. When MSM is feeling particularly sinister, they'll even neutralize movements to disrupt those narratives by propping up false opposition as counterweights and then flooding the movement until it wears out.

a reply to: solarjetman

The media like to make "other", the people that we would otherwise refer to as "us".

I like to stick both middle fingers up, or preferably in the eyes of the forces which drive that tendency, by refusing to accept that paradigm.