Do you consider women that used to be men as women?

Page 8 of 8 [ 121 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

30 Dec 2012, 11:48 pm

Catharascotia wrote:
There is scientific evidence that gender is a continuum...

Please provide a link to the evidence you cite.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,939
Location:      

31 Dec 2012, 12:02 am

XFilesGeek wrote:
You are perfectly entitled to your opinions. Thankfully, other people are not required to live according your opinions, as you are not required to live by theirs.

Agreed.

So far, you've offered nothing besides your opinions on why "surgically altered men" aren't "real women." Thankfully, I'm swayed by actual facts, not opinions. Unfortunately, this is one of those areas where people don't seem to understand the difference between "subjective" and "objective."[/quote]
Equally fortunate is the fact that this thread's title is: "Do you consider women that used to be men as women?" Obviously, for me the answer is, "No". When other people asked me to explain why, I explained my opinions in greater detail because that's what this thread seems to be about -- asking people for their opinions on transgendered women.

So if you want facts, go to medical school.

XFilesGeek wrote:
Furthermore, it's not difficult to treat others with common courtesy. If you want to go out of your way to be a disrespectful douche to someone because you don't like their gender presentation, then you can expect the same in return.

I have always been civil and courteous to the transgendered "women" that I've met in person. I just didn't drool over their surgically-altered bodies or beg to have sex with their surgically-crafted vaginas. I treated them politely, but without personal interest. For some unknown reason, they seemed to have taken this indifference as a personal insult instead.

Whatever ... that's their problem, not mine.



XFilesGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,031
Location: The Oort Cloud

31 Dec 2012, 9:58 am

Catharascotia wrote:
XFilesGeek wrote:
Fnord wrote:
ladystardust wrote:
...yes, they're women. I don't see why people have a problem with that. If they consider themselves a woman, then they're a woman.

So if a man considers himself to be a woman, then he's a woman ... interesting ... would you then say that if a man considers himself to be Jesus of Nazareth (whom some call, "Christ"), then he's Jesus Christ? How about if a woman considers herself to be Lady Diana; is she then Lady Diana?

What you do not see a problem with is called a "Delusional Disorder", which typically occurs in the context of neurological or mental illness; specifically in psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia, paraphrenia, manic episodes of bipolar disorder, and psychotic depression.

The current treatment of the transsexual delusion (e.g., being born into the "wrong" sexual phenotype) is to indulge the deluded person's dysmorphia and try to surgically modify the appearance of their bodies to conform to the delusional image. By this reasoning, those who believe themselves to be Jesus should be treated by surgically altering their hands and feet to conform to the stigmata - the holes left by the nails that were driven through Jesus' hands and feet at his crucifixion.


You are perfectly entitled to your opinions.

Thankfully, other people are not required to live according your opinions, as you are not required to live by theirs.

So far, you've offered nothing besides your opinions on why "surgically altered men" aren't "real women." Thankfully, I'm swayed by actual facts, not opinions. Unfortunately, this is one of those areas where people don't seem to understand the difference between "subjective" and "objective." Carry on.

Furthermore, it's not difficult to treat others with common courtesy. If you want to go out of your way to be a disrespectful douche to someone because you don't like their gender presentation, then you can expect the same in return.


There is scientific evidence that gender is a continuum, that all of us have both male and female characteristics to some degree or other and that one's gender identity can be different from one's physiology. Every medical professional worth their salt agrees that gender is much, much more than whether you have male parts or female parts. This is why sex change surgeries are medically valid and if you have transitioned you can have your gender legally changed in government documents. There is no "continuum of being Jesus", nor is there scientific evidence that someone who isn't physically Jesus should be considered Jesus. That's why there's a difference.

So obviously, I agree that if a person considers themselves male or female, then they should be treated as such. As one trans person told me, "Gender is what's in your head, sex is what's in your pants." I think what's in someone's head is much more important in defining who they are.


Agreed.

I've read how scientists have found that transgendered people's brains are structurally similar to the brains of the sex they FEEL they are. Heck, a study by Simon Baron-Cohen found that the brains of autistic people are more likely to be "gender neutral."

I've never quite understood why people give more weight to genitalia than brains. You would think the human brain would be more important in determining someone's identity.

I guess because brains are "invisible" that people forget they exist or something. In any case, I don't see why it's such a huge issue to some individuals.

Emotional reasoning............blech.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


seaturtleisland
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,243

08 Feb 2013, 5:23 pm

puddingmouse wrote:
Try as I might, my mind still separates transwomen from 'female at birth'. This is because the two have completely different experiences of being socialised into gender. Gender to me is partly how you're socialised from birth, and since transwomen were originally socialised to be men (against their will), I have to two different categories in my mind. I don't think one is better, or 'more womanly', than the other. I don't treat them any differently.

I don't consider them to be men, I consider them to be transwomen, which I see as a type of woman. Sorry, I'm just being honest. I know this isn't what you want to hear.


That's fair. I've heard it before and I agree. When being raised male you are treated like a male.

What I don't like is when that distinction is used to discriminate against transwoman. We might not have any pre-transitional or childhood experience but sooner or later when we do present as female we have to deal with the treatment. Either we will be visible and we'll experience transphobia or people will be oblivious and they'll treat us however they would treat another woman.

I'm obviously not going to jump into a conversation about a physical issue I'll probably never have to deal with. The thread about "tampons vs pads" on this forum is one I couldn't contribute much to.


One thing people might not realize is that even if people treat us as males when we grow up we still respond to the messages we receive as females. Telling me to "be a man" never had any effect even when I was growing up being socialized as a male. Getting sent the message that females are supposed to be social butterflies did have an effect on me. It pressured me to put a lot of work in making up for my social deficits. I don't think I would've felt that pressure if I were a cisgendered male.



Draka
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 116
Location: Deep inside my head and so far away.

09 Feb 2013, 2:33 pm

If they believe they are women, then they are women. Everyone should be able to feel themselves in their own bodies, and that includes transgender individuals.



flora
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 8 Feb 2013
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 52

09 Feb 2013, 7:20 pm

If they identify as female, then why not consider them to be female?

Denying someone's identity is ignorant.



TrainofLove
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2012
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 416
Location: New Zealand

18 Feb 2013, 1:39 am

Nope, If you're born a male, you're a male, and vise versa.


_________________
"He was slower than a nudist trying to climb a barbed wire fence" - Benny Hill


Yuugiri
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2013
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,049
Location: Washington

19 Feb 2013, 2:21 am

Fnord wrote:
Please provide a link to the evidence you cite.


Here you go.

Trans women are women, period. Some people don't accept this. It sucks, but it'll probably always be the case (as it will with bigotry regarding race and sexual orientation).

TrainofLove wrote:
Nope, If you're born a male, you're a male, and vise versa.

Why?


_________________
Averages
AS: 138.8
NT : 54.6


Wrackspurt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 733

24 Feb 2013, 8:21 am

Does it really matter to anyone other than themselves and those who are their direct partners?

When I have donated my hair in the past I have heard under the breath comments of "I thought it was a boy/guy." It made me think. What does it really matter to you regardless?

People are so quick to slap on labels and to categorize.