Tiring rule
Tiring rule
Latest hits: if gender is performative that means it’s fake and patriarchy doesn’t exist! I don’t know who Judith Butler is!
Of course you'll have a better time talking about gender with other gender enthusiasts. It's like complaining about how normies can't have a conversation with you about cars for as long as car enthusiasts could.
‘Gender enthusiasts’ is probably my second favorite euphemism for trans people now. The first being from an old lady who was trying to politely ask if a woman was trans and asked if she was “a woman by choice” 😂
"factory stock" vs. "aftermarket custom"
I rather like the sound of "a woman by choice", since it implies she is a woman, that it is a choice, and that the choice does apply. I'd be curious to hear opinions from trans people about that, but it seems very respectful.
Love it. Relevant xkcd
The fact that it's an evenly split partisan issue with only 0.5% of the population being trans means that you have A LOT of cis allies. Like, statistically, you're more likely to meet several dozens of understanding people than another trans person unless you actively limit your exposure of non-trans people.
There are probably some (not many but some) trans people who conform to binary gender identity beliefs, too, they simply want to be the other gender.
Except cis allies will stab us in the back the microsecond it’ll become slightly uncomfortable. We’re always on probation with them, and we have to be "the good, quiet, binary and unchallenging trans people" to deserve any allyship or support
If you're going to be annoying about it, then people won't like you. Imagine if you had a friend who used Arch Linux and that's all that they talked about and then they said people who use Windows are literally Hitler and the second you say, hey maybe chill a little bit, they start screeching.
I believe you just need better friends or to lose a bit your bias.
Lol I'm assuming the downvotes "prove" your own point to you, but this is a real pointless take if you can't even provide examples.
It’s a shame you feel that way, but it might be the people you personally know. Look in most leftist circles. You’ll find a robust selection of true allies.
This is my first downdoot on a blahaj post post, or probably meme in general... I get it's mostly just a joke, but still.
Cis people aren't all fucked in the head or clueless, just like trans people aren't. Allies are able to push for, or at least support trans rights, and unfortunately are a lifeline for trans folk that get shoved out of discussions for "bias."
The "cis bad" memes just add to the lack of understanding, and force and "us vs them" mentality, based only on gender expression. It's not even an optics thing... It just comes off as wanting to be a victim, before Mr Chadson or Ms Becky have been transphobic, or pushed for a bathroom bill, which almost demands a defensive attidude from them both.
Anyways, I have talked with people that are painfully unaware of how gender works/exists. Whether intentional or not, it is not a great time. I would dip out of the interaction ASAP, unless they are trying to understand or learn, which is kind of rare in most cases.
This meme says cis people are like babies and that I find them tiring, not that they are bad for being cis.
👍
-insert a good faith response to your bad faith, pedantic (at best) argument here-
there are so many people out there who can not fathom that the world could in fact be more complex than the version of it presented to them when they were children.
Im a cis person(tho probably not the kind you meant) and i think talking about gender is pretty tiring. I think everyone has their biases and everything but you can make yourself a good person by trying to understand why you have those biasesa at least. And also gender is a prettt complex thing.
If you’re being open minded and respectful even if you don’t understand something (or disengaging if you can’t) then probably 99% of trans people, myself included, aren’t going to have any issue with your questions or contributions to discussions about gender
It’s the (usually cis) people who are at Gender 101 level engagement, think they’re at Gender 501 level engagement, and also want to understand and learn nothing who make this so goddamn tiring 🥲
Talking about trains with my fellow train drivers:
Talking about trains with those fucking idiot bus drivers who don't know shit:
I got hit with the exact opposite yesterday: "gender cannot be only performative because patriarchy exists and that would mean invalidating people hurt by it"
So tiring
So close yet so far, the entire point is that it's performative and therefore millions of people were hurt for no real reason.
I literally had a moment today where I had to explain to a coworker that some feminine presenting women can have xy chromosomes or swyer syndrome. That apparently jenga towered his cis male beliefs on gender.
The more I look into genders and try to understand it the less I understand. On the gender wiki (apparently gender is so complex it has its own wiki??) I was reading about 'genderfae' and 'genderfoe' kinda understanding it, kinda not. But when I got to the comments and I saw "gender ≠ pronouns" in the comments and I just gave up trying to understand anything 😭
I'm sure I'll look into it more at some point but for a '3am browsing Wikipedia because I can't sleep™️' adventure I did not have the critical thinking for that level of thoughtWhen someone tells me their gender I nod and move on. I neither really care nor do I care to understand it.
Exactly my thoughts.
I'll call you whatever you want, as long as it's not too wacky.
It's all good as long as you feel comfortable in your own skin. I couldn't care less what you identify as, it doesn't impact my life in the slightes.
You do you.
FWIW I would consider regular Wikipedia a much better source to learn about transgender 101 topics, the stuff you’re talking about is really niche even within the trans community, haha
The gender wiki is a bit much for me. I think a lot of its articles need to get revised a bit.
I see it as a heightened period of different people "trying shit out" when it comes to new gender identities. None of these are necessarily definitive norms that will define future society. As with any aspect of language and culture, it's a part of an ongoing process of evolutionary change, adaptation, and discovery. Some might call it a church, some might call it a shifting paradigm, but it's always going to be a bit messy and won't necessarily make perfect sense right away.
The real problem is that studying human behaviour when it comes to gender/sex is inherently flawed as any attempts to isolate nature & nurture would be inhumane. Imagine raising a baby from birth to adulthood never having interacted with another human being just to see whether they portray the behaviours we associate with their gender / sex.
My personal opinion is that it's probably a little of column A, & a little of column B. The higher levels of testosterone in the male sex would naturally lead to higher levels of aggressiveness. But the extent to which that would impact our daily behaviours is a huge unknown. Presumably it accounts for enough to be measurable but not enough to make a difference. But who knows.
P.s If you know more about this than me and have a study that disagrees with me please post it. Haven't done my research as this isn't something I think about day to day.
I am not sure what conversation you may be referring to OP, but in general I think some post modern schools of thought have a danger of getting high on their own farts, and sometimes it’s important to push back so we don’t lose grip on reality.
Yes, there’s a lot in society which is just frameworks and practices, but the nature of reality insists on a fundamental truth, always and forever. Maybe that’s just my materialist bias.
Well yes you are absolutely correct from a materialist standpoint. If you limit reality to material things, then truths are limited to material knowledge. Emergent properties such as subjective experience, society/culture, and ultimately meaning and meaningfulness are excluded from what is considered reality and truth, except for their material correlates. And this is why philosophers moved on from materialism because, while highly fruitful, it was ultimately insufficient in capturing all forms of knowledge.
I prefer a pragmatic blend of constructivist realism.
Except they didn’t move from it, but now I am tired lol
You want to make me even more tired than I already am?
Don’t take the bait then 😘
Edit I mean any time anyone makes a comment which makes you tired :3
Me frantically reading more Butler and Hooks so I’m not seen as a cis normie. /s
If they're questioning your model then just provide a good empirical reference to support it. Works for science.
If only good empirical books on trans research weren't burned by the nazis at the start of their regime and trans literature/research weren't being banned in the U.S. by the GOP...
-
I have published work in academia so I know from experience. Empirical evidence CAN be extremely biased depending on who is doing the writing. There's a reason there's a million (exaggerated, obviously I hope) studies showing that games are both good and bad, studies showing red wine both causes and prevents cancer, studies showing that the Brontosaurus wasn't a real dinosaur but a misplacement of two different fossils, oh wait just kidding there was a new study that says it IS a real dinosaur. People are people, there's no perfect study. When studying humans and their behavior, we only have theory that is constantly being rewritten. We have something called cronbach's alpha that states that as long as data reaches 71% consistency or higher, it's a valid study. All to say, you can't always trust empirical evidence
-
Science already supports the idea of different genders. A basic college biology course could tell you that. Forget "there's only two genders" the "two sexes" thing is also a myth. Humans have two different kinds of sex chromosomes, x and y. We can have I BELIEVE up to 3 at a time? XX is typically associated with FEMALE and XY is typically associated with MALE unless of course you have de la Chapelle syndrome and your XX chromosomes make you develop a penis instead of a vagina. This is just one example of being intersex. Up to 2% of the population is intersex, 4 times more than the number of cops in the U.S.
-
Gender being a science doesn't mean boomers are open and willing to unpack their views of gender though. Unlearning things is painful, scientifically speaking. People HATE unlearning things. There's lots of studies on cogitative dissonance, if you want to go read your empirical references.
-
lol how was my comment removed for transphobia!? This mod team needs to get educated and needs to read, you’re a joke
Edit you know what, idc. If someone’s feelings got hurt, then I am sorry. An Internet forum is not the place to air out my grievances with post modern frameworks. I think queer people deserve better, that’s just my take.
1st, Ada is the instance mod, we have no control over who she decides to ban.
2nd, let's look at your comment. "I think some post modern schools of thought have a danger of getting high on their own farts, and sometimes it’s important to push back so we don’t lose grip on reality."
Defend this. Be more specific. Communication requires a mix of efficiency and effectiveness. Your extremely broad statements allowed the instance mod to "misinterpret" your argument due to it's lack of effectiveness. A lack of specifics forces the reader to interpret your meaning. "Post-modern frameworks" or "post modern schools" can mean anything from critical race theory to anti-Marx criticism.
I'm not surprised that comment was pulled, I'd have also assumed bad intentions.
Since these moderation events often attract people like moths to a flame, consider this: those in LGBTG community spaces may seem a smidge jumpy as bigots often mask their bigotry with imprecise language. What likely is poor word choice in another community has a much higher chance of being thinly veiled abuse here. Cut the mods some slack and please try to use more precise language, especially about sensitive topics.
You’re right that the comment is broad. So I am not talking about any one academic field, like CRT or Queer Theory, but instead I was talking about the underlying philosophical frameworks like post structuralism and new materialism.
One grievance I have in analyzing some of the underlying frameworks is that there seemed to be a schism between academics, which started in the 90s, indicating that some thinkers where trying to re-insert idealist and structural binaries into new materialism, whereas it seems the goal for new materialism was simply to provide a framework for avoiding correlationism.
Here’s one text which validates what I am saying, https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057/s41286-016-0001-y.pdf
I have some other ideas on this regarding subjectivity, but let’s not get into that. But as far as anyone should be concerned, nothing I am saying is against queer people, minorities, or their rights and humanity.
I get where confusion can arise, so for my part I’ll just make sure to keep it clear. Tbh, I was sharing my perspective as a hot take, so it makes sense why someone would find it provocative. I don’t think there’s any reason to assume bigotry, though.
If gender construct, then why chop dick off!?
Yes, I agree, gender discussions are exhausting
Also I think the right side has to have a little ruler in his hand to smack the child for getting wrong what they don't understand. Maybe a rolled up newspaper with this meme printed on it. Very meta.