"I think women have vaginas; I think you call a person with a vagina a woman." Penny Arcade's Gabe s
1,221 replies, posted
not surprised you would use bra burning as an example of stupid feminists though given that you compared transgendered people to wanting to be a taco
[QUOTE=thisispain;41119857]when the word political correctness is mentioned you can assume shit and other stuff that comes out of an ass will get thrown[/QUOTE]
yeah pretty much
[QUOTE=Skelmech;41119576]please calm down, i mean no disrespect to anyone and i don't know why half the replys here have been so agressive and hostile to me.[/QUOTE]
Holy shit the fucking irony.
People are hostile against you because you [I]REFUSE[/I] to calm down even when people are warning you about that you're flying off the handle.
You're just as bad as the transphobic people now, how does that feel?
The other side being dicks are [I]NO EXCUSE[/I] for repeatedly shitposting in a continuous manner.
Be a better poster or don't post at all, everything else just makes it all worse for you, and (sadly) in extension all other transgendered people.
[QUOTE=Van-man;41120096]Holy shit the fucking irony.
People are hostile against you because you [I]REFUSE[/I] to calm down even when people are warning you about that you're flying off the handle.[/QUOTE]
feel free to highlight any posts skel has made in this thread where she's been anything but calm, because I can't remember any
[QUOTE=Dori;41120122]feel free to highlight any posts skel has made where she's been anything but calm, because I can't remember any[/QUOTE]
You gotta be kidding, half his posts were borderline flaming
[QUOTE=Van-man;41120096]
You're just as bad as the transphobic people now[/QUOTE]
haha whatever dude
[QUOTE=thisispain;41119842]im kind of upset that my name wasnt mentioned
i do my best to antagonize people on fp and it doesnt even work anymore[/QUOTE]
I FUCKING KNEW IT
[QUOTE=Van-man;41120096]Holy shit the fucking irony.
People are hostile against you because you [I]REFUSE[/I] to calm down even when people are warning you about that you're flying off the handle.
You're just as bad as the transphobic people now, how does that feel?
The other side being dicks are [I]NO EXCUSE[/I] for repeatedly shitposting in a continuous manner.
Be a better poster or don't post at all, everything else just makes it all worse for you, and (sadly) in extension all other transgendered people.[/QUOTE]
calm down and quit being so melodramatic
and no, skelmech's posting has nothing to do with anyone other than skelmech. if you're too stupid to realize skelmech doesn't represent transgendered people as a whole thats on you and nobody else.
[QUOTE=Van-man;41120096]Holy shit the fucking irony.
People are hostile against you because you [I]REFUSE[/I] to calm down even when people are warning you about that you're flying off the handle.
You're just as bad as the transphobic people now, how does that feel?
The other side being dicks are [I]NO EXCUSE[/I] for repeatedly shitposting in a continuous manner.
Be a better poster or don't post at all, everything else just makes it all worse for you, and (sadly) in extension all other transgendered people.[/QUOTE]
as i said earlier, i used to have a problem with anger when it comes to these threads. I still get angry I guess but I don't tend to let it show because, as you said, it just leads to bad posts and people getting banned.
I've been nothing but calm in this thread, if not a little tired at the same responses you see in every one of these threads.
[QUOTE=Van-man;41120131]You gotta be kidding, half his posts were borderline flaming[/QUOTE]
uh mods??? hello
[QUOTE=Van-man;41120131]You gotta be kidding, half his posts were borderline flaming[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry i've upset you. I didn't mean to. :(
I agree that gender is not as simple as whether you have a dickus or the other less fun one.
That being said I don't understand why they mad, or why this is news.
[QUOTE=Skelmech;41120161]I'm sorry i've upset you. I didn't mean to. :([/QUOTE]
don't worry if you upset him, empathy doesn't matter because science
and here i was thinking i maintained a low profile on FP to the point I was unknown by name to any users
jeez.
[QUOTE=Van-man;41120096]Holy shit the fucking irony.
People are hostile against you because you [I]REFUSE[/I] to calm down even when people are warning you about that you're flying off the handle.
You're just as bad as the transphobic people now, how does that feel?
The other side being dicks are [I]NO EXCUSE[/I] for repeatedly shitposting in a continuous manner.
Be a better poster or don't post at all, everything else just makes it all worse for you, and (sadly) in extension all other transgendered people.[/QUOTE]
is this a joke
[QUOTE=Dori;41120173]don't worry if you upset him, empathy doesn't matter because science[/QUOTE]
i cant even be mean to people on forums anymore without the pc police jumping on my neck
[QUOTE=thisispain;41120198]i cant even be mean to people on forums anymore without the pc police jumping on my neck[/QUOTE]
evolution states that only the fittest survive, so feminazis will die out eventually
[QUOTE=Dori;41120207]evolution states that only the fittest survive, so feminazis will die out eventually[/QUOTE]
hehe they just take their blue pill and live in bliss
[QUOTE=Van-man;41120131]You gotta be kidding, half [B]his[/B] posts were borderline flaming[/QUOTE]
i would figure its obvious but, i am a transgender female, please dont misender me
[QUOTE=thisispain;41119968]i like how you bring this up
feminists never burned their bras. in fact the original bra burning feminist event actually had no burning or bra-removal at all, it was a false report by the media that started that urban myth
look it doesnt matter, people who dislike feminists or transgender people will do so and the justifications dont matter
you think feminism would be differently received if the bra burning myth didnt exist??? get real what a joke[/QUOTE]
Yes, I am aware it is a myth, the "bra burning movement" refers to a limited group during the 60's. They didn't actually burn bras. They were, however, problematic for feminism, and continue to be today. They are taken and further radicalized by fictional media programs and have become a self perpetuating problem that actual feminists have limited avenues to combat.
My concern is that something similar will happen for transgender people and will make for a very long and uphill battle. The knee jerk reaction may be to take up and express a radical viewpoint, but it will only make the problem worse.
[QUOTE=Dori;41120207]evolution states that only the fittest survive, so feminazis will die out eventually[/QUOTE]
Eberlution means those who are most likely to reproduce are most likely to pass on their genes and possibly also their beliefs and those who are most likely to reproduce are those who are most adapted to their environment and those who are more readily willing to reproduce
Since feminazis don't want the D it is almost assured they will die out. Thanks Obama.
actual feminists have no reason nor interest in combating media myths; its counterproductive
i feel like you missed the point entirely of what i said, my point was that the transgender community will be disrespected regardless of how many imaginary "radicals" there might be
just because it wasnt voiced till a certain event doesnt mean it didnt exist, people will hate political feminism regardless of how many bra-burners there are because political feminism is progressive in nature and will be hated by reactionaries and conservatives regardless of what garment is burnt
[QUOTE=GunFox;41120282]Yes, I am aware it is a myth, the "bra burning movement" refers to a limited group during the 60's. They didn't actually burn bras. They were, however, problematic for feminism, and continue to be today. They are taken and further radicalized by fictional media programs and have become a self perpetuating problem that actual feminists have limited avenues to combat.
My concern is that something similar will happen for transgender people and will make for a very long and uphill battle. The knee jerk reaction may be to take up and express a radical viewpoint, but it will only make the problem worse.[/QUOTE]
what the fuck are you talking about
they were "problematic for feminism" because people outright made shit up about them to make them look bad, and nah, i'm not buying that you had any clue bra burning was a myth. you're just backpedaling because you said something stupid based on a myth you don't know anything about and now you're pretending that for some outlandish reason you still decided to claim bra burners (who dont exist) are an issue for feminism lol. what something similar will happen to transgendered people?? what are you talking about? someone will make something up about transgendered people or what?
[QUOTE=SGTSpartans;41115340]I don't understand why people have to accept everything?
I mean yeah transgenders and stuff aren't wrong or evil in doing their thing but that doesn't mean everyone has to accept that and be OK with it.
Personally I agree with him, but there's no reason for him to be receiving the same kind of hate transgenders receive.[/QUOTE]
holy fuck why are you all rating this dumb
society doesn't exist to be all daisies and roses and everyone having a circlejerk because our beliefs align perfectly. there are ALWAYS going to be people who disagree with the whole gay/transgender movement just like there are STILL people that hate rock and roll music.
[QUOTE=PelPix123;41120313]I agree. Radical trans-feminism is a problem for our community a lot of the time.[/QUOTE]
i think radical trans-feminism isn't the issue, the issue is people who try and pretend "radical trans-feminism" is a serious thing that exists outside of fringe blogs on tumblr
[editline]21st June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=FFStudios;41120337]holy fuck why are you all rating this dumb
society doesn't exist to be all daisies and roses and everyone having a circlejerk because our beliefs align perfectly. there are ALWAYS going to be people who disagree with the whole gay/transgender movement just like there are STILL people that hate rock and roll music.[/QUOTE]
because theres no reason to not accept transgendered people other than being an ignorant dickhead
[QUOTE=PelPix123;41120313]I agree. Radical trans-feminism is a problem for our community a lot of the time.[/QUOTE]
i dont know what radical trans-feminism is, but without radical feminist thought in the 70s transgender people would still be in tiny isolated underground communities getting attacked by thugs
for every germaine greer there has also been a gloria steinem
[QUOTE=GunFox;41120282]They didn't actually burn bras. [/QUOTE]
i have only taken two semesters of american history but it doesn't take a genius to know that the "bra burning movement" legitimately burnt their bras.
exhibit a (which was found using nothing more than google images with the search keywords "bra burning movement"):
[img]http://mediamythalert.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/bra-burning_freedomtrashcan.jpg[/img]
Why are you guys being aggressive towards GunFox, of course radical feminism will be bad for feminism, are you mad? He's worried that the same sort of radicalism could come to the trans movement and give trans people a much harder time securing social acceptance.
[B]WARNING, MASSIVE WALL OF TEXT INCOMING, but please read if you refer to trans people by their biological sex![/B]
'Kay, reading through this thread there seems to be quite a lot of confusion about to referring people as the gender they identify, as opposed to their "biological sex", and which one you should do. This rant is generally addressed to Lambadvanced since you were arguing that the most. Sorry this is so gigantic, but I wanted to lay down a watertight case as to why you're wrong for doing the latter.
[B]Assuming you know how they identify, I think it's much better to refer to people as the gender they identify as, because:
A.[/B] (Simple bit and kind of the most important) If you aren't it's very rude and hurtful for the person in question. There's no benefit to misgendering someone like that (unless you think doing it enough times will get them to "snap out of it", which isn't going to happen, i.e. you're wrong), so you're effectively causing people unnecessary suffering for no reason other than to give yourself some personal satisfaction over being "correct". This is a pretty dickish thing to do, even if it's not done with the intention of hurting people, because you know what effect it'll have and you're doing it anyway.
[B]B.[/B] It's not even "correct", in an objective sense. You may say, science says women have vaginas/XY chromosomes, therefore, it is correct! Well, it's not as simple as that. Let's leave aside for the moment the fact that there are people born with vaginas who have XY chromosomes, so those groups aren't even the same, even though they overlap.
Science doesn't say anything about the meaning of words. Science says the world is a certain way (e.g. things fall down, the Earth rotates around the Sun), but words and their definitions are purely things people assign to things for the purpose of conveying ideas. The definition of words are, at the end of the day, completely arbitrary, and they can change. There's nothing intrinsic to the collection of syllables that make up the word "woman" that mean "a human with a vagina" or "a human with an XY chromosome" or even "a human whose gender identity is female". People give the word woman a definition because it's useful to have a way to convey a concept, whatever that concept may be. If a word isn't very good at conveying that concept, then it ceases to be a useful word.
Bringing back the fact that there are people born with vaginas who have XY chromosomes. This falls under Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, and someone posted a picture of people with this condition earlier in the thread. Now, if you're someone who defines woman as meaning "someone with an XY chromosome", would you seriously go up to [URL="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c0/Orchids01.JPG/800px-Orchids01.JPG"]these ladies[/URL], call them men, and refer to them with male pronouns? If you do, you aren't using the term "men" in the way people think of when they hear the term. When people say someone is a man, the thing you typically think about isn't their genetic makeup, it's who they are as a person. So, by using the term "men" to refer to them and not "women", the term becomes fairly useless, because it's not conveying the concept that you intend it to convey.
And that gets to the crux of it. If you're going to stubbornly stick to a rigid definition of a "woman" and "man" based on the physical attributes of people (and worse, their associated pronouns), I'd argue that you're not utilizing the language in a particularly useful way, because they [I]aren't[/I] typically used to [I]just[/I] refer to physical attributes, they have a [I]ton[/I] of other concepts and baggage associated with them. For that people use the phrase "biologically male", or if you want to be specific and carry even less unrelated baggage "someone with an XY-chromosome". When you say "a woman", you're conveying all the associated meaning that that word has, which has a lot more to do with someone's identity and their behaviour, [I]who they are as a person[/I], rather than how part of their lower body is formed and how the DNA molecules in their cells are configured. And when you're using the word in a way that ignores that, it's conveying a whole load of concepts that are not only incorrect, but [I]completely counter[/I] to who this person actually is.
So effectively the word as you're using it is basically useless, as its whole function is to accurately reflect the concepts it's describing. Ergo, while you aren't [I]incorrect[/I] in using the words like that, as the words themselves have no objective correct meaning, you're not correct either for the same reason, and moreover you're not using language in a useful way when using it, which just leads to confusion and general unpleasantness.
But how should you define "man" and "woman", then, if not based on physical attributes? Well, this goes back to the start - just call people as how they identify. Like I said, in everyday use those terms are generally understood to convey the person - their personality, identity, behaviour - all that stuff, other things are relatively secondary. So if someone identifies as a woman, calling them such is perfectly correct from that standpoint, and with the benefit of not causing unnecessary suffering (see A), and the overall point of B, which is that it's a more useful term in more settings, and it can take into account outliers, be they the people in the picture above with AIS, or transwomen, or anyone who doesn't fit every single criteria that you can possibly throw at the word "woman" (and let's face it, many people who we'd ordinarily call women don't, when you think about it). If you need to talk about physical and biological attributes specifically, there's plenty of terms to use for that, but with everyday use referring to people as they identify is definitely the most sensible solution.
[B]So, tl;dr gender people how they wish to be because otherwise you're being a dick and you're not using the words in a way that conveys their meaning properly. I hope this helps some people, and again apologies for being overly long![/B]
[QUOTE=Kopimi;41120339]
because theres no reason to not accept transgendered people other than being an ignorant dickhead[/QUOTE]
why does everyone have to put their dick in other people's business though? do you REALLY give that much of a fuck if someone disagrees with you? wow we should vilify millions of people based on that then. all i'm saying is that you shouldn't give so much of a fuck about what other people are doing, live your own life and live it to your own morals
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.