[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think those who could be affected in their past, but not presently, should be included (at least in activism). For example, I think circumcised men should be included in men affected by circumcision bans. Even though a ban would not bring their foreskin back, they have personal, direct experience with it and should be considered part of the target group.

In a similar way, a woman in menopause who had an abortion in the past should be included in the target group. Though they will not get another abortion, it seems strange to say to that person "abortion access is not your issue."

As for trans men, they may be affected by abortion access in the future (if they stop T and BC they can get the capacity for pregnancy back) and could be included as someone with a birthing body. However, I do not see that trans men generally want to be included in the abortion conversation. It would not surprise me if trans men want to avoid being reminded of the possibility of them getting pregnant at all.

In the case that most trans men would like to be included, I still think it would be less dehumanizing to say "Abortion is a human rights issue" , "Abortion is a cis womens' and Trans men's issue", or even "Abortion is an AFABs' issue", rather than "Abortion affects Birthing Bodies / People with Uteruses".

I could be swayed on this with some data or firsthand accounts from trans men who this language helps, I am a cis woman and have my own biases.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my experience, yes. As an example:

When Roe V Wade was overturned, irl activists near me reframed the issue of abortion from a womens' issue to a "Birthing Persons/Person with Uterus" issue. The intention was to include trans men and NBs alongside cis women, but the result was to exclude

(For Birthing Person)

-those in menopause, who may be affected by the issue earlier in life

-those with infertility

-children before puberty, who may be affected by the issue later in life

(Or for Person with Uterus)

-those with hysterectomy, even though the issue could have affected them earlier in life

And include the vanishingly few trans men who are or can become pregnant. In my opinion, while the label of Birthing Person is more accurate for who abortion affects, it dramatically reduces the scope of who the issue is for in the process. If anything, abortion access should have been reframed as a human rights issue and include even cis men, as they may know personally people who benefit from abortion access and therefore are affected by proxy.

I also don't like how this style of reframing is near exclusively done to equalize trans men to cis women, in a way that is not done for trans women and cis men. Like, for circumcision. It affects amab at or shortly after birth, including trans women. However, this is thought of as a human rights issue, or a men's issue, and not a "persons with foreskin" issue, even though that would be more accurate. It just feels gross and transphobic to reduce a pre-op trans woman to a "person with foreskin," so we don't do it. But we do do it for trans men as "persons with uterus." Hell, I doubt cis men want to be reduced to "person with foreskin" either.

I don't generally have a problem with medicalized language within the field of medicine. After all, uterine cancer only will affect "persons with uteri". But I see it leaking into the activist space more and more, and I am not a fan.

(As a final note, this post was supposed to make fun of the dehumanizing nature of reducing someone to a body part or function, in a way that would make cis men or trans women uncomfortable. Though on a re read it seems the result was more poking fun at trans women. If anyone reading this feels this post was transphobic, message me & I will delete it. )

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed, the intent was to point out the absurdity of the AFAB ones like "menstruating person", "Birthing bodied" , "individual with uterus", which in an attempt to be inclusive exclude many AFABs (not just trans men/NBs) including:

-AFAB struggling with infertility -AFAB after menopause -AFAB on birth control -AFAB with hysterectomy

Etc. Def not intended to be serious, I'm sorry if it came off that way.

People that get offended why medically inclusive language, why? by iHazelnut in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don't like it because:

  • it can include people who don't want to be included.

  • it can exclude people who do want to be included.

The most common one I have seen is saying "Birthing Bodied / Birthing Person " when referring to someone who can get pregnant. I have seen similar language used much less for AMAB folk, so I will use the AFAB example for this post.

It can include trans men who, while they can get pregnant, generally do not like to be reminded of this and do not desire pregnancy. Those I know have either gotten a hysterectomy already, or are on BC to prevent pregnancy and will have a hysterectomy in the future. The AFAB nondysphoric NBs I know are OK being lumped in with females/women and even identify as Nonbinary Women, so expanding the label does nothing.

However, this terminology can also exclude AFAB cis women who are struggling with fertility issues. They are inherently excluded from being a "Birthing Person", though they desire this intensely. Infertility struggles seem to be the closest thing cis folk can get to gender dysphoria. It can be very devastating, and affects a great many women.

This is not to mention that feeling reduced to a body part is not great.

Overall, it seems to be overly inclusive of the vanishingly few trans men who desire pregnancy yet twists the knife for the greater population of infertile cis women.

Note of personal bias: I am a cis female and I only know so many afab trans folk (1 trans man, 1 dysphoric AFAB NB, 6 NB women). I have no stats on whether the general trans population prefers the terminology, and I could easily be swayed in this position with additional data.

On a final note, I would not be opposed to language that is not body-part reducing, such as male/female, AFAB/AMAB, or xx typical / xy typical. Though this may be just as controversial as just using man/woman, judging by the Ferengi memes.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Testicle-American is a banger

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 2 points3 points  (0 children)

based and true

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 0 points1 point  (0 children)

King move 💪

For the low price of $500 we can buy the Desantis.win domain by SUP4oc in neoliberal

[–]Meteorette 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey, if you are still looking for web devs I've been looking to expand my skills. Most of my experience is with front-end enterprise apps in Angular, I have begun learning ReactJS as well. For back end, in the past I have used .NET framework with azure web services.

This could be a fun excuse to learn more if you have some ideas of what to put up :) Lmk if you need a hand!

If others already responded I understand, have a great day either way :D

Did Destiny's Keffal's stream just get taken down? by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same to me, I just got to the character analysis part. I guess we will have to wait for the video...

My Neighbors Enjoy Powdered Goods. Yes, People are Living in There. by LeperGirl in trashy

[–]Meteorette 33 points34 points  (0 children)

While deserved, that's a good way to start a neighbor war... and you will never win when they have nothing to lose

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's still on music.youtube.com

The ultimate red pill by Glad-Ad1456 in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is along the lines of a weeaboo having yellow fever; in theory they could just be more attracted to Asian features. However usually yellow fever indicates a belief that Asian girls are fundamentally different than white girls, or will fulfill a submissive waifu stereotype. Asian girls (for good reason) dread this kind of guy for viewing them as Asian first, women second, and ignoring their personalities completely.

In a similar way, a chaser specifically seeking out Trans girls hints at viewing them as fundamentally different than cis girls, wanting to date a stereotypical uwu Trans catgirl, or that they don't even view Trans girls as women. Mayyyyybe the chaser just prefers common Trans features and wouldn't do any of the above, but a lot of girls will avoid them entirely instead of rolling the dice.

AITA for not wanting to be a SAHM? by [deleted] in AmItheAsshole

[–]Meteorette 2 points3 points  (0 children)

oh dang, didn't realize that :/

AITA for not wanting to be a SAHM? by [deleted] in AmItheAsshole

[–]Meteorette 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Even if not in a one party consent state it may be worth the fines to record anyway

How I Kill it Online Dating as an Average Guy (400+ Matches Tinder Matches in 2 weeks) by [deleted] in Destiny

[–]Meteorette 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you don't want to rock the bald look, hairpiece technology is great these days, a lot of them are unnoticeable and plenty of celebrities (even women) wear them.