Baresark said:
1. Yes, some people are ignorant. I personally feel that most people are not though. That is my opinion and we may just have to agree to disagree. We can't have society run on what a few ignorant people will think when the majority understand the situation.
Except for the fact that the ignorant are the majority. Just for example when the news comes out that I'm trans, the first three questions I generally get asked by a cisgender person are as follows: "Are you gay?". "If I saw you naked would I be able to tell?", and "Does this mean you're a pedophile/chomo?" In order they are, not that person's business, not that person's business and inappropriate, and a grievous insult along with being inappropriate and stupid. It's not a what a few ignorant people think, it's what can easily be crammed down the throats of the ignorant masses, because in fact the majority of people are ignorant on trans folk and trans issues. Period.
Baresark said:
2. We have come a long way from the 1950's. It was in '72 when homosexuality was taken out of the DSM, we have also moved significantly forward from that point. Even in light of how far we have progressed from those times, people still choose to believe that homosexual men are synonymous with child molesters. No amount of political correction in movies, television, books, the internet... will change those peoples minds.
Except that the overtly bigoted preach to ignorant masses, who generally can be swayed with ignorant and hate hateful diatribes into voting for those bigots. When it comes to trans acceptance we haven't progressed much, and the L&G part of the LGBTIQ+ Community generally works against all parts that aren't directly the L&G factions. Infact trans acceptances has sort of back slid because of a constant assault from our supposed L&G allies.
Baresark said:
I don't have to justify what ignorant people choose to believe, and that is really the main issue. They choose to believe it. If they want to see a more accurate depiction of any of the LGBT community, there are literally a bunch of alternate TV stations they could watch to see that. That means that no matter how much you wipe out bad depictions, they may simply choose to not watch the accurate depictions that exist because it doesn't fit their narrative or what they want to believe. And furthermore, media should not lower itself to creating content to correct the lowest common denominator, which in this case would be bigots who have chosen to ignore the truth and believe the fantasy. Should we make sure no one puts dragons in movies because there may be some people out there who think dragons are real because of it? No, that doesn't make any sense.
1)
You don't have to justify the opinion of anyone else, or your own for that matter. Still that doesn't mean you get free reign to decide if an issue important to the trans community is indeed important.
2) Alternative TV stations seem great, except they're generally not included in extended basic cable, which is what most people have, and most people don't know of their existance, let alone know if they want to watch them.
3) Your non-sequitur argument about adds nothing, because there aren't real dragons who get attacked in the streets by bigots using fictional depictions to weaponize their own hatred. Because it's not about believing a fantasy, it's about using fiction as a valid defense for one's own bias, which is generally accepted by the majority of people.
Baresark said:
3. I never stated transgender in relation to the main character. The main character IS an unwilling participant in what turns them into a Transsexual. I completely understand the difference between the two. Gender and sex, while overlapping in some ways are not the same thing. You are the one who is misinformed here, not I. I intentionally typed that in that manner so as not to exclude anyone from my statement because it stands in both cases in my opinion.
The problem that the character isn't transsexual, transsexuals are ones who actively seek sexual reassignment surgery, getting the surgery actually doesn't have a baring. The character is mutilated by a rogue surgeon. Still this is going to be used to reinforce the bias of many loud bigots with political platforms, the utilization will undoubtedly splash back badly on the trans community, there is no question about this. It's been done with too many other bad representations, it'll be done with this one, and like in the past, this method still works.
Baresark said:
4. When I stated reasonable people, that means they live their lives and make decisions based on reason. So, no, no reasonable person would see a bad depictions of of the LGBT community in a movie and think that is accurate. If they do, they are not using reason, therefore are not reasonable people.
A person is reasonable, people are not, besides the methods that are going to be used in conjunction with attacks using this bad representation are not going to be appeals to reason. Because attacks on the LGBTIQ+ community, especially the trans community are never reasonable, they usually rely on faith, and they generally work. Because when it comes right down to it, ignorance spawns fear, fear is unreasonable, and it's not hard to exploit that, even with blatant lies.
Baresark said:
5. A movie isn't going to make someone who thinks LGBT people are lesser people vote against them. Just like if we only were privy to truly accurate depictions of these people, then those same people would still not vote in favor of their rights.
The problem is that a the representation by it self is not the key problem, it's how it's going to be added to an assortment of weapons that are being used to deny a segment of the population rights. The trans community is actively denied rights too, companies can refuse to hire me, I can be refused service at any business, I can be refused housing, and so on, all because I'm trans and it's still legal to discriminate against trans folk. A bad, or good representation is not going to change anyone's mind, but it's effective as another tool against, or for the subject in question.
On Topic: Well this figures. It's a stupid plot, with stupid ideas about what it takes to transition, and it's being used in a blatantly offensive matter that people will fail to fully wrap their heads around. While this is going to be just another tool for the anti-trans types, it's not the worst thing that ever happened to the trans community. Still it's massively insulting, while at the same time it highlights the nasty shortsighted transphobic notions still being clung to in film and television. That last part is the worst part, that media still refuses to take us seriously, which in turn helps everyone not take us seriously either. It's really depressing and frustrating that the trans community is still a joke and an easily exploited stereotype to so many.