Transgender

1404142434446»

Comments

  • LouiseLouise Epiphanies Host
    edited January 25
    These actions from President Biden have really been a real tonic for those of us in the UK who have been getting derided as 'woke' by the the anti-trans commenters who try to pass themselves off as left-liberal. They now have to admit they stood with Trump on this and think President B, a moderate Democrat, is a dangerous radical!
  • Louise wrote: »
    These actions from President Biden have really been a real tonic for those of us in the UK who have been getting derided as 'woke' by the the anti-trans commenters who try to pass themselves off as left-liberal. They now have to admit they stood with Trump on this and think President B, a moderate Democrat, is a dangerous radical!

    Ye shall know a man by the company he keeps.
  • I'm concerned about the safety of trans members of the military, particularly if they're known or suspected. I'm not sure how many there were before the ban. But non-trans women and men in the military are already sexually harassed and raped. (Even murdered, at Ft. Hood.) Given how some people feel about trans persons and anyone who's different...

    :votive:
  • RussRuss Ship-mate
    That Doctrinal Statement seems to leave out gender, and gender identity. Just talking about sex misses the point.

    I suspect that is on purpose. I suspect that they take as an assumption that gender and sex are the same.

    One of the uses of the word "gender" is simply as a synonym for "sex". A usage which avoids the overtones of the other meaning of "sex" (as an abbreviation of "sexual intercourse").

    Another meaning of "gender" relates not to male/female but to masculine/feminine - the cultural identification of certain clothes or certain behaviours with one sex or the other. Some of which may be arbitrary and some of which can be related back to sex-linked differences.

    It's not clear to me how far those who use the term "gender identity" are referencing the first or the second meaning of gender.

    And that ambiguity is a cause of conflict with feminists who think it important to distinguish femininity and femaleness.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Russ wrote: »
    That Doctrinal Statement seems to leave out gender, and gender identity. Just talking about sex misses the point.

    I suspect that is on purpose. I suspect that they take as an assumption that gender and sex are the same.

    One of the uses of the word "gender" is simply as a synonym for "sex". A usage which avoids the overtones of the other meaning of "sex" (as an abbreviation of "sexual intercourse").

    Another meaning of "gender" relates not to male/female but to masculine/feminine - the cultural identification of certain clothes or certain behaviours with one sex or the other. Some of which may be arbitrary and some of which can be related back to sex-linked differences.

    It's not clear to me how far those who use the term "gender identity" are referencing the first or the second meaning of gender.

    And that ambiguity is a cause of conflict with feminists who think it important to distinguish femininity and femaleness.

    It's not really either of those. One can be a tomboy who completely rejects societal norms for women and yet still not for a moment identify as a trans man.

    It's about an inner sense of what one is, not how one behaves.
  • Gender in our language and culture has come to be associated with male/female/other/etc. This is recent. It also in some languages and cultures is associated with other things, such living/not living, can move itself/cannot move independently. Probably it reflects the unusual sexual and personal identity aspects of our culture. There's also an aspect of hyper individualism involved.

    As is reflected in Cree culture: everything to you <European-derived> people is about sex, and everything is dead to you except yourself.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    edited January 26
    @KarlLB
    One can be a tomboy who completely rejects societal norms for women and yet still not for a moment identify as a trans man.

    It's about an inner sense of what one is, not how one behaves.

    That’s certainly true for me - and for my niece. She’s never worn a dress in her life. She built a Dutch barge from sheets of steel, she was driving a tractor aged 12 etc etc. But she’s very much a heterosexual woman when it comes to sexual preference.

    I was the same. I wanted to be a boy, I played with boys and boys toys, never owned a doll, always wore trousers. But I always fancied boys sexually (long haired ones admittedly!)
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited January 26
    Boogie wrote: »
    @KarlLB
    One can be a tomboy who completely rejects societal norms for women and yet still not for a moment identify as a trans man.

    It's about an inner sense of what one is, not how one behaves.

    That’s certainly true for me - and for my niece. She’s never worn a dress in her life. She built a Dutch barge from sheets of steel, she was driving a tractor aged 12 etc etc. But she’s very much a heterosexual woman when it comes to sexual preference.

    I was the same. I wanted to be a boy, I played with boys and boys toys, never owned a doll, always wore trousers. But I always fancied boys sexually (long haired ones admittedly!)

    It's not about sexual orientation. You can be all you've described and also lesbian, or asexual, or bi but still not be a trans man.

    At the same time, you could be trans and gay.
  • CrœsosCrœsos Shipmate
    Golden Key wrote: »
    I'm concerned about the safety of trans members of the military, particularly if they're known or suspected. I'm not sure how many there were before the ban. But non-trans women and men in the military are already sexually harassed and raped. (Even murdered, at Ft. Hood.) Given how some people feel about trans persons and anyone who's different...

    If the U.S. military was going to be held back by such concerns they'd still have racially segregated units.
  • Croesos--

    My concern is for the trans members of the military. I think it's good they have the opportunity serve again. I'm not advocating any kind of segregation. I'm simply saying that they *will* be in danger from non-trans members of the military. I don't know if there's a way to protect them, or if The Brass will try: military women and men are sexually harassed and raped by others in the military, and that's been deeply and throroughly covered up for a very long time. There've been some small holes in the cover-up in recent years, and truth has leaked out.

    And AIUI racially desegregating the military was dangerous and brutal, too.
Sign In or Register to comment.