Super straight on tiktok

Schadrach

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 25, 2020
1,636
214
68
Country
US
c) I haven't said a word about Elliot Page, that was Schadrach.
And I literally just picked him because he was a recent and public trans person. The whole point being to demonstrate that different contradictory notions get thrown around, but all are discarded whenever they would be inconvenient to the immediate question at hand.

Is gender an immutable part of one's identity, a label they choose and can change at will, a set of behaviors and affect one displays or doesn't at will, some combination of those or something else entirely? What I see a lot of is switching between those depending on whichever would be most convenient at the moment.

You kinda see the same thing with abortion and "just a clump of cells" where a fetus is "just a clump of cells" to make abortion more morally acceptable, but that fetus magically becomes a baby in any context that isn't about the mother's right to terminate it.

People are "forced to change their definitions" if their definitions aren't useful or accurate in a given situation.
Definitions are whatever is convenient for current political activism, to be replaced by new definitions in any context where the old definitions inconvenient logical consequences.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
6,295
1,918
118
Country
United Kingdom
Definitions are whatever is convenient for current political activism, to be replaced by new definitions in any context where the old definitions inconvenient logical consequences.
The only people placing convenience over accuracy are those who would claim to know someone else's identity better than they themselves do.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
3,739
615
118
Country
USA
The only people placing convenience over accuracy are those who would claim to know someone else's identity better than they themselves do.
The very concept of social identities is claiming knowledge of how other people think and feel. That's not limited to gender or sexuality, that's everything, and it can be good or terrible depending on the identity. Like, I can identify as a Republican, and it's very uncontroversial, since that's a chosen identity, it's literally just saying I think like people who think like me. Racial identity is a good illustrator of both sides of the coin: a black person in the US can identify as black because there is a certain amount of shared experience to say "yes, I understand how another black person in the US feels". It becomes very unacceptable for someone without that shared experience to try and identify as black, because a person saying they identify as black is saying "I understand how black people feel", which is a wildly offensive thing to say if you're caucasian. Like, you're pointing out the problem of someone acting like they know another's identity better than they do, but I think the core of that problem is acting like they know someone's thoughts and feelings better than they do, and that's ultimately the same problem with improper use of identity. If someone declares they identify as X while having a totally different experience from people who they are identifying with, while having very different thoughts and feelings from the people they are identifying with, they are basically saying "I know what it feels like to be you better than you do yourself."

This is the endless conflict between transgenderism and certain aspects of feminism. A trans-woman identifying as a woman is implicitly saying "I know what it feels like to be a woman", and while I can't personally tell you what that feels like in any sense, and I'm not going to claim they are wrong, there is a definite subset of the female sex who hear that message and think "no, you don't. Don't pretend you know what it feels like to be me." Which is a sentiment I think you can sympathize with.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
6,295
1,918
118
Country
United Kingdom
The very concept of social identities is claiming knowledge of how other people think and feel. That's not limited to gender or sexuality, that's everything, and it can be good or terrible depending on the identity. Like, I can identify as a Republican, and it's very uncontroversial, since that's a chosen identity, it's literally just saying I think like people who think like me. Racial identity is a good illustrator of both sides of the coin: a black person in the US can identify as black because there is a certain amount of shared experience to say "yes, I understand how another black person in the US feels". It becomes very unacceptable for someone without that shared experience to try and identify as black, because a person saying they identify as black is saying "I understand how black people feel", which is a wildly offensive thing to say if you're caucasian. Like, you're pointing out the problem of someone acting like they know another's identity better than they do, but I think the core of that problem is acting like they know someone's thoughts and feelings better than they do, and that's ultimately the same problem with improper use of identity. If someone declares they identify as X while having a totally different experience from people who they are identifying with, while having very different thoughts and feelings from the people they are identifying with, they are basically saying "I know what it feels like to be you better than you do yourself."

This is the endless conflict between transgenderism and certain aspects of feminism. A trans-woman identifying as a woman is implicitly saying "I know what it feels like to be a woman", and while I can't personally tell you what that feels like in any sense, and I'm not going to claim they are wrong, there is a definite subset of the female sex who hear that message and think "no, you don't. Don't pretend you know what it feels like to be me." Which is a sentiment I think you can sympathize with.
I can sympathise with it so long as it isn't used to justify gatekeeping prejudices.

Two people who share a characteristic (such as the female gender) can have wildly different experiences. They may share certain elements; they may not share many others. Recognising that is all that's required to recognise that trans women are women.

I'm a man. Does that mean I claim knowledge of how other men think and feel? No, of course not: I'm just going to have some shared elements. And lots of unshared ones.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,101
4,289
118
The very concept of social identities is claiming knowledge of how other people think and feel. That's not limited to gender or sexuality, that's everything, and it can be good or terrible depending on the identity. Like, I can identify as a Republican, and it's very uncontroversial, since that's a chosen identity, it's literally just saying I think like people who think like me. Racial identity is a good illustrator of both sides of the coin: a black person in the US can identify as black because there is a certain amount of shared experience to say "yes, I understand how another black person in the US feels". It becomes very unacceptable for someone without that shared experience to try and identify as black, because a person saying they identify as black is saying "I understand how black people feel", which is a wildly offensive thing to say if you're caucasian. Like, you're pointing out the problem of someone acting like they know another's identity better than they do, but I think the core of that problem is acting like they know someone's thoughts and feelings better than they do, and that's ultimately the same problem with improper use of identity. If someone declares they identify as X while having a totally different experience from people who they are identifying with, while having very different thoughts and feelings from the people they are identifying with, they are basically saying "I know what it feels like to be you better than you do yourself."
I'm really not sure this is as true as you make out. The range of human variety is such that In practice, the experiences of two Republicans or two black people can be incredibly, wildly different, so different that it is almost meaningless to assume commonality bar the very limited fact of voting Republican or being black. Your average rural Texan Republican voter very likely has more in common with his Democratic voting next-door neighbour than a New York Republican.

All Republicans really need is a shared idea of voting Republican, despite all their other potential differences. But then, I can't help but notice that lots of Republicans disavow other Republicans (e.g. "RINOs") - so gatekeeping is I think a much wider phenomenon than you suggest.

Although I think you're right that the objection many cis- feminists have is that they believe they have experiences due to their gender that many transwomen have not and even cannot, and that means aspects of their identity are separate and not for transwomen to be part of or dictate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
3,739
615
118
Country
USA
Two people who share a characteristic (such as the female gender) can have wildly different experiences. They may share certain elements; they may not share many others. Recognising that is all that's required to recognise that trans women are women.
If I may be more specific, I would focus down on specifically the shared experiences that define the identity. I don't think all black Americans share all the same experiences, and I apologize for leaving open the implication, but I just mean to say that there are a set of shared experiences and feelings that make the shared identity meaningful. Like, everyone shares certain elements of their experience, some things are just the human experience, but sharing those elements with women doesn't let me identify as a woman. It's specific shared elements unique to women that allows "woman" to exist as an identity. I don't know what those elements are, and even a woman trying to define what makes someone a woman is gatekeeping other women, but conversely an individual deciding for themselves what those elements are while lacking that commonality with women is problematic in the same way. "I am part of X group because of Y" and "You're not part of X group because of Y" are both statements that can be correct or can be offensive if they aren't.
I'm really not sure this is as true as you make out. The range of human variety is such that In practice, the experiences of two Republicans or two black people can be incredibly, wildly different, so different that it is almost meaningless to assume commonality bar the very limited fact of voting Republican or being black. Your average rural Texan Republican voter very likely has more in common with his Democratic voting next-door neighbour than a New York Republican.
I do prefer what you're saying to the idea of grouping people by identities, but I also understand specific identities exist, and I don't want to dismiss the merit of them in the right circumstances. I don't want to make someone into a stereotype or a trope of their identity, but tropes are a tool for writers to make an audience comfortable in their fiction, identities are a tool by which people can find comfortable interactions with others. To say "we share this experience" is, I think, a generally positive interaction.
All Republicans really need is a shared idea of voting Republican, despite all their other potential differences. But then, I can't help but notice that lots of Republicans disavow other Republicans (e.g. "RINOs") - so gatekeeping is I think a much wider phenomenon than you suggest.
I mean, a RINO is a Republican on paper, which is not the same as identifying with Republicans. I know that's an odd sentence, but it's perfectly common to have someone who does something like register as a Republican but not claim to identify with other Republicans, and that's just sort of a consequence of a two-party system.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 12, 2020
4,448
2,256
118
Country
United States
Trans women don't belive they know more about being a woman than cis women, the fuck is that TERFy bullshit?
Trans women are women because they feel they are women. That's it, that's the end of that sentence. Any extra bullshit leads to women getting harassed for not being feminine enough, and yes, women pull that bullshit too.

I mean, a RINO is a Republican on paper, which is not the same as identifying with Republicans. I know that's an odd sentence, but it's perfectly common to have someone who does something like register as a Republican but not claim to identify with other Republicans, and that's just sort of a consequence of a two-party system.
How many of those people then run for public office as Republicans, win elections as Republicans, fundraise for Republicans, then hold office as Republicans for years until they're outed as not being real Republicans because they decided not to be universally shitty towards out groups?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Thaluikhain

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
7,101
4,289
118
I mean, a RINO is a Republican on paper, which is not the same as identifying with Republicans. I know that's an odd sentence, but it's perfectly common to have someone who does something like register as a Republican but not claim to identify with other Republicans, and that's just sort of a consequence of a two-party system.
The accusation of RINO is clearly levelled at established Republicans, even to the levels of the US Senate, who have devoted substantial decades of their life to the party but fail an internal "purity test" of other members. It is more pronounced in two party systems, but exists in more diverse multi-party systems because at some point a party still has to represent allied stances, even if the existence of additional parties means fewer have to settle for a weak fit.

identities are a tool by which people can find comfortable interactions with others. To say "we share this experience" is, I think, a generally positive interaction.
Well yes, bar perhaps the most extreme of loners, everyone has some yearning to get along, feel a sense of community. It is mostly positive, except for the fact the comforting warmth of inclusivity can stop at the boundary of the group, and promptly to turn into vicious exclusivity. Nor can that disguise the fact some (all?) identities exist with schism; the commonality is challenged between those who share it. Heresy, as we might call it - and as we have all seen, often a heretic can be tolerated less than a total outsider.
 

Dreiko

Elite Member
Legacy
May 1, 2020
1,822
591
118
CT
Country
usa
Gender
male, pronouns: your majesty/my lord/daddy
Nobody is having a problem with people just perceiving them as something. People make mistakes, and we all unavoidably make assumptions based on appearances.

The problem arises once you know how they identify, if you then continue to insist that your own opinion on their gender is more important than theirs.

I like how you worded that, because yes, the issue here is that people continue to perceive them that way even when given that information, and to acquiesce to that is to in effect lie to yourself about your perception and to that person about the impression they give others. The rude thing is to just call people's perceptions wrong when in fact they are by definition right. Like how you don't own other people's gender identities, you don't own other people's perceptions either, and you can't force them to perceive you how you want when that clashes with other aspects about you that outweigh your feelings and cause you to come off one way instead of another.

People are "forced to change their definitions" if their definitions aren't useful or accurate in a given situation. Learning things isn't rude.

No people are never forced to change their definitions, they will organically update them but that happens willingly because they genuinely think the newer definition represents reality better. Instead of just claiming something, I think acting it out is more useful if you want definitions to change. Less tell, more show.


Like for example, if you're not trying to enter in a relationship with someone during that interaction, I'd think someone who feels like they're a woman would not need to behave like a trans person or a member of a special community or something else, they'd just be a woman. Women don't usually make a big deal of just...being women. So if you always were a woman to begin with on the inside there's no need for all the bells and whistles. Now this does get more complicated if you're broaching relationships but on a basic common courtesy and politeness angle the solution really just is being women fully and solely, instead of being trans. Trans should be this temporary liminal state people exit in until they become whatever they feel like and then they should just be that other thing, not still a special sub-group. That designation alone brings a ton of attention and singles em out as something different.
 
Last edited:

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
2,198
1,450
118
Country
USA
I like how you worded that, because yes, the issue here is that people continue to perceive them that way even when given that information, and to acquiesce to that is to in effect lie to yourself about your perception and to that person about the impression they give others. The rude thing is to just call people's perceptions wrong when in fact they are by definition right. Like how you don't own other people's gender identities, you don't own other people's perceptions either, and you can't force them to perceive you how you want when that clashes with other aspects about you that outweigh your feelings and cause you to come off one way instead of another.
What a load of crap. It is very much possible to perceive something incorrectly and happens every day. The world was here first, dude, you don't get to dictate terms to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
6,295
1,918
118
Country
United Kingdom
I like how you worded that, because yes, the issue here is that people continue to perceive them that way even when given that information, and to acquiesce to that is to in effect lie to yourself about your perception and to that person about the impression they give others.
Bollocks. It's to recognise that your perception or the "impression" you think they make doesn't mean squat as far as someone else's identity is concerned. Perception + impression =/= identity.

The rude thing is to just call people's perceptions wrong when in fact they are by definition right. Like how you don't own other people's gender identities, you don't own other people's perceptions either, and you can't force them to perceive you how you want when that clashes with other aspects about you that outweigh your feelings and cause you to come off one way instead of another.
Someone's "perception" is not by definition right. If I think I see a star, then later find out that a satellite was giving off that light, then my "perception" wasn't correct.

You're insisting that the satellite is a star nonetheless because that's what you perceived, and that it's inexplicably rude of the astronomer to tell you otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheMysteriousGX

Dreiko

Elite Member
Legacy
May 1, 2020
1,822
591
118
CT
Country
usa
Gender
male, pronouns: your majesty/my lord/daddy
What a load of crap. It is very much possible to perceive something incorrectly and happens every day. The world was here first, dude, you don't get to dictate terms to it.
I'm not the one dictating a bunch of new genders into existence though when in the world we can observe all sorts of life forms have mainly just 2 of them.


And are we supposed to believe people's perceptions (including their self-perception of their own gender) or are we not supposed to?


Like, I'm fine with letting something I don't believe is true to pass but in turn you have to do the same with something I believe you don't think is true. If it's only a one way street then I'll just start rejecting your perceptions back at you.

Someone's "perception" is not by definition right. If I think I see a star, then later find out that a satellite was giving off that light, then my "perception" wasn't correct.

You're insisting that the satellite is a star nonetheless because that's what you perceived, and that it's inexplicably rude of the astronomer to tell you otherwise.
The astronomer gives you a telescope and shows you the science behind how it works and lets you look at the stars, he doesn't just say he feels one way and we have to respect him or we're being rude to astronomy. In fact, the astronomer doesn't give a fuck if we don't believe him because he's secure in the knowledge that he's right. He doesn't get offended that some people still think the earth is flat and the moon is made out of cheese.



And you're really not getting what I mean. People's perceptions are right in the sense that it is how they take you in, whether THAT is accurate is a different subject, but the fact is they take you in thusly and you can't change that. Asking people to believe you over their lying eyes is not the way to go about it.
 
Last edited:

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
2,198
1,450
118
Country
USA
I'm not the one dictating a bunch of new genders into existence
Who is? Certainly no one in this thread. And there are dozens of cultures that have had more than 2 gender identities for millennia. Seriously, how have you never heard of 2-spirits at the very least?

though when in the world we can observe all sorts of life forms have mainly just 2 of them.
You're thinking of biological sex again. The fact that you refuse to accept that gender and sex are not interchangeable terms in a biological context is your own personal failure of intellect, imagination and empathy.

And are we supposed to believe people's perceptions (including their self-perception of their own gender) or are we not supposed to?
Because I'm not an asshole, I take trans people at their word. It's not difficult to separate who is trans from someone who's just acting in bad faith.

Like, I'm fine with letting something I don't believe is true to pass
No you're not, or this conversation never would have happened.
 

Dreiko

Elite Member
Legacy
May 1, 2020
1,822
591
118
CT
Country
usa
Gender
male, pronouns: your majesty/my lord/daddy
Who is? Certainly no one in this thread. And there are dozens of cultures that have had more than 2 gender identities for millennia. Seriously, how have you never heard of 2-spirits at the very least?



You're thinking of biological sex again. The fact that you refuse to accept that gender and sex are not interchangeable terms in a biological context is your own personal failure of intellect, imagination and empathy.



Because I'm not an asshole, I take trans people at their word. It's not difficult to separate who is trans from someone who's just acting in bad faith.



No you're not, or this conversation never would have happened.
This conversation is in response to people not being let pass to identify as super straight, which is the thing I am referencing. If you want others to believe your perceptions you first have to lead by example and believe theirs. And that is even more pronounced when you're someone who has known first hand the ills of not being believed. You should be even more for believing them.



And no I get the triad of gender sex and attraction and how they can all be mismatched in a person, but the thing is you have a lot of people using them interchangeably as is. On any side of the argument. I'm not causing that, I'm just taking advantage of it. When you have people who say they identify as female, are we supposed to correct them because that's a sex and not a gender, or are we supposed to not be rude? And will we be treated differently when we do that as opposed to when someone corrects someone who identifies as a woman? I don't think so.
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
2,198
1,450
118
Country
USA
This conversation is in response to people not being let pass to identify as super straight, which is the thing I am referencing. If you want others to believe your perceptions you first have to lead by example and believe theirs. And that is even more pronounced when you're someone who has known first hand the ills of not being believed. You should be even more for believing them.
Unlike you, I can judge when people are acting in bad faith.

And no I get the triad of gender sex and attraction and how they can all be mismatched in a person,
No, you really don't. And everything following demonstrates that. At this point, you're just being difficult for the sake of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 26, 2020
6,295
1,918
118
Country
United Kingdom
The astronomer gives you a telescope and shows you the science behind how it works and lets you look at the stars, he doesn't just say he feels one way and we have to respect him or we're being rude to astronomy. In fact, the astronomer doesn't give a fuck if we don't believe him because he's secure in the knowledge that he's right. He doesn't get offended that some people still think the earth is flat and the moon is made out of cheese.
Lol, no, an astronomer is a professional. It's not his job to give you all the tools to figure it out and then just leave it up to you whether it's a satellite or a star.

But that's not the point of the analogy. The person "perceiving" it as a star is wrong. Perceptions can be wrong. Nobody is talking about "offence"; the astronomer is correct, and the flat-earther is incorrect, and the flat-earther's "perception" is worthless nonsense.


And you're really not getting what I mean. People's perceptions are right in the sense that it is how they take you in, whether THAT is accurate is a different subject, but the fact is they take you in thusly and you can't change that. Asking people to believe you over their lying eyes is not the way to go about it.
This is a confused mess of a point. If someone has perceived something inaccurately, their perception was... inaccurate.

Its got to take monumental arrogance to opine that even if your perception didn't match reality, then its still somehow right anyway. We're into looking-glass logic.

And yes, if I have to decide between 1) me reckoning someone is gender 1 based purely on looks, and 2) what they actually tell me, I'm going to go with 2. Because... looks aren't authoritative. This may surprise you, but men can look feminine and women can look masculine. Ostensible physical appearance doesn't mean much.
 

Schadrach

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 25, 2020
1,636
214
68
Country
US
Trans women are women because they feel they are women. That's it, that's the end of that sentence.
Is Rachel Dolezal black? She identifies as black. She claims that she feels like she is black. If she's not black, why isn't she black?

What about "plural" people? If you feel that you are 3 or 4 different people then that is definitely who you are and any attempt to treat that as a mental disorder or something requiring treatment is monstrous, right?

What identity labels am I if I declare I am, what ones have to have some connection to something else, and is it ever right to challenge or medicalize the labels one gives themselves?

How many of those people then run for public office as Republicans, win elections as Republicans, fundraise for Republicans, then hold office as Republicans for years until they're outed as not being real Republicans because they decided not to be universally shitty towards out groups?
The Democrat version of this would be from my state. Joe Manchin. He runs for office as a Democrat, wins elections as a Democrat, fundraises as a Democrat, held office as a Democrat for years and yet it's not hard to find Democrats willing to declare him not a real Democrat.

As opposed to our governor, who switched parties to Democrat, won election for governor, then switched party back to Republican 7 months later. Literally Democrat In Name Only, it's not like he went through 2 reversals of all his political beliefs in a year.
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
2,198
1,450
118
Country
USA
Is Rachel Dolezal black? She identifies as black. She claims that she feels like she is black. If she's not black, why isn't she black?

What about "plural" people? If you feel that you are 3 or 4 different people then that is definitely who you are and any attempt to treat that as a mental disorder or something requiring treatment is monstrous, right?

What identity labels am I if I declare I am, what ones have to have some connection to something else, and is it ever right to challenge or medicalize the labels one gives themselves?
Your argument hinges on your own inability to differentiate who is being earnest from who is being a twat. Do you really want to argue that you're that dense?
 

Schadrach

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 25, 2020
1,636
214
68
Country
US
Your argument hinges on your own inability to differentiate who is being earnest from who is being a twat. Do you really want to argue that you're that dense?
That's just a dodge.

Again, is Rachel Dolezal black? Why or why not?

For an example of the second, back at the height of his/her/its/xer speed running for GDQ was ProtoMagicalGirl/DoubleGearSystem 3-4 people inhabiting a single body, each with different pronouns and gender identities? Why or why not?

Is Jessica Yaniv a woman? Why or why not?

If Eliot Page is a man (which I'll take as assumed that we agree on), was Eliot Page always a man? Why or why not? If not, when did they become a man?

"People who identify as $IDENTITY are $IDENTITY because they feel they are $IDENTITY. That's it, that's the end of that sentence." Does that apply generally? Does it only apply specifically to gender (but not to anything else)? Why or why not?