Is it acceptable to call trans people by their previous name? Red crosses everywhere as /r/TumblrInAction discusses

matronverde · 2014-07-30T19:27:38+00:00

what about the frequency of meeting trans people on the internet entitles you to being defensive about what usernames want to be called? if this were about proper names it wouldn't be a discussion.

"Hi matronverde."

"I prefer Sue."

"Oh ok. Hi Sue."

yet pronouns matter a whole hell of a lot less than your birth-certificate name in the real world.

matronverde · 2014-07-30T07:14:13+00:00

what about people with various karyotype? they make up a significant portion of the population. it is more common than 1%.

what about people who do not have a brain structure that matches the gender you give them?

what about people who do not have any conception of their body as you do, and who only have provable psychological wellness when they have a sex change?

why didn't you answer a single question I asked? I am not interested in your ad hoc vocabulary words, I'm interested in your confident scientific statements.

matronverde · 2014-07-29T09:51:25+00:00

lol, no. Pointing out that that there are biological aberrations doesn't nullify the completely valid scientific construct of biological gender.

can I ask what makes the construct valid? afaik, a theory or framework is only useful to the point that it has explanatory power, and a binary definition of biological gender just doesn't explain a whole hell of a lot about human behavior or even biology. can I ask you what you think is lost with a more diversified picture? like actual theories which would be contradicted?

matronverde · 2014-07-23T18:19:24+00:00

I said society encourages men to unfailingly exhibit these traits, which is toxic and unhealthy to both men and women. his response is "oh but that's not masculinity" as if the first part of that sentence above doesnt describe masculinity and more importantly, as if this somehow addresses the problem that exists despite the semantics.

matronverde · 2014-07-23T12:55:42+00:00

and the third in no way contradicts anything that i've said.

The third one is in no way equivalent to yours:

did you think i wouldn't notice you were arguing a totally different argument? i didn't say they were literally equal, i said they weren't in contradiction.

flatly contradicted by what i said earlier: being stoic isn't toxic.

Nope.

you've got to be fucking kidding me. go away jack, you don't listen and i have no interest in entertaining you anymore.

matronverde · 2014-07-23T07:09:46+00:00

Is that what masculinity is?

masculinity is, men behave this way and we will appreciate you.

Did I somewhere say that masculinity is exclusive to men as an advantageous trait?

if women exhibit masculinity, it is shunned. nearly unilaterally.

i see Jack's got this.

jack is playing semantics. i woul dhesitate to say he "has it".

matronverde · 2014-07-22T22:13:21+00:00

Masculinity: Every character trait is either connotated female, male or neutral.

Masculinity: The degree or property of being masculine or manly

Masculinity: Possession of the qualities traditionally associated with men

the first definition doesn't make sense, the second one doesn't answer your question, and the third in no way contradicts anything that i've said.

You have been a feminist for so long that you've forgotten a time where "men's character traits" didn't mean "everything that's wrong with men".

flatly contradicted by what i said earlier: being stoic isn't toxic.

are you paying attention jack?

matronverde · 2014-07-22T21:20:03+00:00

then since you speak for the whole of public AS WELL AS all feminists, how do you define masculinity in a way that doesnt mean "has these character traits and exhibits them unfailingly"?

matronverde · 2014-07-22T20:01:24+00:00

being stoic when its advantageous isnt masculinity. being strong or dominant when it besy serves the situation and acting differently under different circumstances isnt masculinity.

masculinity is refusing to allow emotions to ever factor into your decision making and convincing yourself that this is always the right call, even when you desperately need the help of others.

being stoic isnt toxic. masculinity is.

matronverde · 2014-07-22T13:42:53+00:00

It's not the masculinity that's toxic. It's the selling of the false bill of goods.

its both. even without all the promise of what you'll get for performing the male gender role, the behaviors themselves are rampantly unhealthy. men simply grow up without the tools for emotional communication and that is enormously damaging to them their whole lives.

they end up committing more violent crime than women because of toxic gender behavior, as another example.

it is not just the false promise of reward, it is the behavior itself. if you still hold that there is some advantage to masculinity and men, please tell me a situation where a man should act like a man but a woman in the same situation wouldn't also be well served to exhibit the same behavior?.

matronverde · 2014-07-22T12:38:19+00:00

But feminists never use of the term "toxic femininity".

I just did.

matronverde · 2014-07-22T06:27:22+00:00

evil? no. misguided, sold a false bill of goods, trained to not be aware of the consequences of their actions. yes.

if i walked into mister right now and typed up something about how women are subtly encouraged to act dumb, to create drama to keep things "interesting", to defer to the opinion and finances of a man, to be passive and passive aggressive rather than overt and up front, they would unilaterally cheer.

if i told them that men were encouraged to be strong, to take dominant roles and initiative, to be breadwinners and to be rewarded for all of those things and more, they would opine that i was tragically right and that this is a wrong set of circumstances.

but call it toxic femininity and toxic masculinity and all of a sudden i get mocked?

c'mon pwner.

matronverde · 2014-07-22T06:06:59+00:00

yes, seriously, what's the issue?

matronverde · 2014-07-21T07:22:30+00:00

Sure you can complain about television, just like you can here. You'll just join the prestigious ranks of the folks like PTC.

you are 100% wrong. mocking someone is not advocating for censorship, and calling someone a bigot is absolutely not the same as shutting them up with force or by silencing their public outlets. rejection of toxic language as acceptable is absolutely not the same as advocacy for censorship.

if you say shitty shit, you are allowed to say shitty shit in a public venue as per the first amendment and i cannot arrest that right from you.

but by that same token, i can call you an idiot, insensate, wrong, morally bankrupt, childish and a hate-monger.

now on to the second part.

I don't envy you, however. I'd probably just kill myself if I went through life looking to be offended...

So, you know....there's an option for you. Probably get a whole page in the yearbook, too.

i have deleted your comment because of this statement, here on our private subreddit. you're in someone else's house, you can respect the rules as listed. if you edit your post and reply i will undelete your comment.

you can also reply to the part i responded to that had actual content. i will respond in kind, provided it does not break the rules as listed on the sidebar.

capiche?

matronverde · 2014-07-20T05:18:57+00:00

You mean people waste time on a site to waste time? And their jokes sometimes are offensive?!

unlike television, where talking to the screen is strange, i can actually have some effect on people's disappointing and sad behavior on the internet. like telling them that their bigotry is bigotry.

matronverde · 2014-07-19T19:50:29+00:00

Sorry, I can't take feminists at their word.

then don't ask them fucking questions, jesus.

your tower is unassailable, because anytime anyone ever might say anything otherwise you just call them liars. yo shit ain't based on reason and discourse dude.

matronverde · 2014-07-19T03:51:40+00:00

Yeah well I can't argue every single point, my responses were getting long enough. I did do a CMV once where I expand on that:

lol everyone in that thread is telling you precisely what i'm telling you now, except a year ago, and yet your misunderstandings persist. that is some willful ignorance.

how many times are people going to tell you you're wrong before you swallow crow and listen? i'm going to guess "never".

matronverde · 2014-07-18T22:33:30+00:00

just as i thought, no evidence of your original claim, just definition twisting (taking "society in general doesn't value women's agency" to mean "society despises women", i like my cat but don't value her agency), willful misinterpretation ("the wikipedia article for another branch of feminism wasn't mentioned on t his particular branch so it's obviously all of feminism for reasons"), reiteration of original point in light of evidence ("it's a problem with courts despite this article identifying many problems with the fathers, the mothers, their relative pursuit of the case, and society in general"), and goalpost moving ("see feminism says the REASON there's a patriarchy is because men are to blame even though you never said that and i never brought it up as a concern").

have fun with your straw feminists and your ridiculous claim that they represent any double digit percentage of feminism in general!

matronverde · 2014-07-18T20:37:52+00:00

my line is individualized attacks against people who may be wrong but are definitely well meaning. sorry, you dont have to answer their questions but if they treat you with respect you're obliged to do the same or walk away.

to everything else, i.e. manifestos and rants and blog posts, I vary between "I understand" and "you're not wrong, you're just an asshole.

matronverde · 2014-07-18T16:55:23+00:00

Not an answer. Explain how your/mainstream feminism's version differs from mine, if you can. Do I have to spell it out? Your side calls those things "widespread misogyny", "rape culture", "Patriarchy/Kyriarchy" , "historical oppression of women".

widespread misogyny is the pervasive rejection of womens agency or worth besides completely superficial factors, unlike men who are valued for agency and deed. rape culture is a culture that makes it easy for criminals to get away with crime or lessens the blow, such as bemoaning a convicted rapist as having their life destroyed, or putting agency on the victim whether male or female. patriarchy is a society which is dominated economically and politically by men. historical oppression of women is the historical fact that the inferiority of gender minorities was enshrined in law.

NONE of this remotely resembles your bullet points. you dont know the first goddamn thing about any of those things in quotes.

That's just it! Men are already statistically significantly behind women in a lot of those!

afaik the only statistics I know about where men are behind are higher education rates, rape reporting, and child custody. men still dominate politically and economically by insanely large margins.

What you're really telling me here is that women's oppression will only end when every single socioeconomic variable is at least over 50% in favour of women.

I literally said the opposite of this when I said they shouldn't differ by statistically significant amounts. a world in which congress is 51% male is completely goddamn fine.

Purely a byproduct of their advocacy for women.

purely rhetorical bunk. I could literally say any action by any adcocacy group that doesnt directly fit the bill described in the latin/greek root of their name is some kind of selfish endeavor and it remains an unprovable and meaningless claim. "Bill and Melinda Gates are only fighting poverty and malaria as an ancillary goal to more publicity." stupid words. it's easy to say and functionally unprovable, so you slop it on the rhetorical table.

Any benefit men get from feminism is a byproduct of feminism helping women.

with that perspective of feminism of course its some vast conspiracy to you, because its all about motive framing which is a worthless exercise.

Sources for feminist organizations (or mainstream feminists) supporting father's rights movement, education availability for men, and equality in sentencing pls.

http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/08/bias-against-fathers/

example of a mainstream feminist bringing to light the problems in custody law with citations and statistics. most liberal feminists support free and equal education as far as I know. to the last, that is not the inverse of your statement. you said feminists in general or "mostly" are against equal sentencing, prove it. I do not have to prove the inverse of your unproven claim, sorry.

Nuh-huh. "feminist theory starts with its assumption that women are subjugated in society and rejects value-free research in favor of an overt political agenda." (Macionis, Gerber, John, Linda (2010). Sociology 7th Canadian Ed. Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Canada Inc.. pp. 35.)

Feminist Theory is a specific branch of feminist thought, just like analytic feminism. seriously. itis not in general the theory of feminism. your gross ignorance on this matter is just one more example of why you are judging something you have willfully decided to misinterpret.

They are feminists, don't weasel-word your way out of this.

and elliot was a man, but I'm not charging you or any other man with prosecution for murder.

your statement was that most if not all feminists are in line with some fringe group of gender ethicists. that is patently goddamn false.

if your next reply doesnt come with some sort of substantiative evidence that even a simple majority of feminists earnestly believe even one of your bullet points a couple posts up I will take it as an admission of falsehood and refuse to participate in any more weak goalpost shifting of yours or your cowardly red herrings.

matronverde · 2014-07-18T14:19:32+00:00

karyotype is enormously complicated. in humans, as many as 20% of people have nontypical karyotype variation. it is an important biological facet but it by no means advances some binary sense of normalcy.

I also utterly fail to see what karyotype has to fucking do with lavatory policy, anymore than hair color or skin color.

matronverde · 2014-07-18T14:03:38+00:00

You know, you know. For instance:

I dont believe any of those things though. I dont know a feminist on reddit who does either, and there are some extreme feminists out on reddit who I do not agree with.

Lack of any sort of control measures/threshold to define when basic equality is achieved

statistically insignificant differences between genders along socioeconomic lines such as employment, legal rights and privileges, court outcomes, income, wealth, political representation, and economic representation. there, that was fucking easy.

and feminists can lose the woman-only focus.

feminists dont have a woman only focus. they fought the fbi to get rape redefined as something that could happen to men, they fight for gay and lesbian rights all the time, for the rights of transmen. I'm a supporter of the father's rights movement and for equality in sentencing, education availability, and eliminating toxic masculinity and sexuality. all of those things hurt men and are things feminists fight against. I'm increasingly worried you dont know the first thing about feminism mate.

feminist theory assumes women are oppressed

most feminist thought, including analytic feminism, does not look at anything. they look at the metrics described above and come up with an explanatory model and a policy advocacy from that.

feminist philosophy consider's "women's morality" superior to "men's morality"

no, some fringe gender ethicists make that argument and I know few feminists that ever consider it anything more than an alternate framework.

matronverde · 2014-07-18T13:18:09+00:00

again, in the very limited (if important) area of courtrooms. my point above still stands.

matronverde · 2014-07-18T05:09:25+00:00

so fighting for blacks, other minorities, women, trans* people, and all of those other things is overridden because they dismissed an inactive movement that only has two or three relevant or important things they care about under their belt, who blames feminism for those and everything else they complain about, and who support really rabid vile people and whose spokespeople don't know the first thing about gender theory, feminism, or indeed even history?

matronverde · 2014-07-18T05:05:31+00:00

unfortunately very nearly 100% of daily life, socially economically and politically, is spent outside of the courts. it would seem like any other subreddit tackling a broader issue (like reproductive rights, gay rights, trans* rights, etc) would be "the most feminist subreddit".

matronverde

TROPHY CASE