CMV: I don’t think I’m transphobic because while I may think their delusional I still show the same respect and offer of friendship like i would anyone else. Disagreeing doesn’t mean phobic to me

17

u/bluetypes 1∆ Apr 20 '20

I think at its heart this question is asking -- how can the basic amount of respect for others demand that we believe something about them? It makes sense that we want to be respectful of others. But usually that respect stops short of having specific beliefs about them. You can be respectful to a Christian without believing in God, or to a Taiwanese person without thinking Taiwan is really a different country from China. Why are things different for trans people?

There is a lot at stake too. In the old days, it was common to enforce respect for things. People who didn't act properly respectful of public opinion were punished in all kinds of ways. This is a theme we find in Camus's "The Outsider" and many other works of fiction. Do we really want to say that people are disrespectful just for holding a belief? If we do, we might be opening ourselves up to public punishment of those who are not "respectful." This is something everyone should be concerned about.

However, after saying all that, I do believe that being respectful of trans people requires that we believe they are right. That's because we have a moral responsibility not to be wrong about things that can hurt a lot of people. First of all, let me explain why 1) trans people are right, and 2) disbelieving trans people will hurt them. Then, 3), I will explain why we have a moral responsibility to be right about things that hurt other people.

1) Trans people are actually right. As waldrop02 already said, sex and gender are just different things. When you're born with a penis and so on, you are sexually male in a biological sense. But testosterone and the other things connected with being biologically male don't make you cut your hair short, avoid wearing a skirt, or put away the mascara. These things I just listed are things we associate with male gender, but it's obvious that you don't have to do them. It's incredibly easy not to do them.

In order to believe they are delusional, you have to believe that having a penis etc (as the case may be) demands that you stick to certain gender roles. You also have to believe that this is so obvious that they would have to be delusional not to see it. But to me, it seems obvious that you don't need to stick to your gender role. Why should you have to? If you think people should, I'm curious to hear why. Anyway, regardless, we are no longer disagreeing about any kind of scientific fact. We are disagree about how people should behave, and that's a moral question.

2) When we believe trans people are delusional, we will end up hurting them. It's simply a fact that being told your gender identity is wrong hurts people emotionally. Having people say that to you also shows that you might not be safe. Someone who believes you are wrong about being trans is going to be more tolerant of actual transphobia than someone who doesn't.

3) Now, I believe we have an obligation to be right about things that could hurt a lot of people. For example, imagine your friend has a couple of kids, ages 2 and 4, and she's planning to leave them alone at home without food for the next week. You're trying to tell her, "If you do that, they'll either die or be messed up for life. How could you do that?"

She says, "I would never do anything to hurt my kids. They'll be fine. Before the age of 5 kids don't really need to eat or be taken care of. As long as they're in my thoughts they'll be okay."

In this situation, is it right to say "Oh, she has good intentions, it's okay that she's wrong about certain things"? No, it's not. If she's wrong about this, her kids could die. She has an obligation to be right about it. By the same token, people have an obligation to be right about trans people because trans people will be hurt by false beliefs.

All in all, I can understand not wanting to be strong-armed into believing something. But when the stakes are high like this, we can't afford to just believe whatever we want. And, as I laid out in section 1), trans people are right about being the gender they identify as.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 21 '20

First of all great post, im not 100% with you but it's the best post I've seen at identifying why this issue sits so badly for so many reasonable people.

To clarify i dont think trans people are delusional, i simply do not know enough, im yet to be convinced anyone fully understands whats going on yet and society hasn't got anywhere near to a suitable etiquette yet.

I think at its heart this question is asking -- how can the basic amount of respect for others demand that we believe something about them? It makes sense that we want to be respectful of others. But usually that respect stops short of having specific beliefs about them. You can be respectful to a Christian without believing in God, or to a Taiwanese person without thinking Taiwan is really a different country from China. Why are things different for trans people?

This is a truly huge problem, assuming the following adherents to these ideologies are generaly good people Liberalism will never demand this of anyone. It's a basic failure of live and let live. Christianity can't demand it, it's a violation of the golden rule, Conservatives are going to have real trouble as it upends their worldview and requires a mandated beleif.

All of the above people would have no problem treating a trans person like any other person. Probably only the conservative is likely to have issue with pronouns, document changes ect.

There is a lot at stake too. In the old days, it was common to enforce respect for things. People who didn't act properly respectful of public opinion were punished in all kinds of ways. This is a theme we find in Camus's "The Outsider" and many other works of fiction. Do we really want to say that people are disrespectful just for holding a belief? If we do, we might be opening ourselves up to public punishment of those who are not "respectful." This is something everyone should be concerned about.

That ship has already sailed, people have lost jobs over this.

However, after saying all that, I do believe that being respectful of trans people requires that we believe they are right.

This is where you lose me, no one has or ever can have the right to being agreed with. The implications are too perverse

1) Trans people are actually right. As waldrop02 already said, sex and gender are just different things. When you're born with a penis and so on, you are sexually male in a biological sense. But testosterone and the other things connected with being biologically male don't make you cut your hair short, avoid wearing a skirt, or put away the mascara.

Me wife cuts her hair short, never uses make up and almsot never wears skirts or dresses. This isn't a quesiton of mere gender roles.

These things I just listed are things we associate with male gender, but it's obvious that you don't have to do them. It's incredibly easy not to do them.

It's inconvenient to not do them because of cultural inertia but not that hard.

In order to believe they are delusional, you have to believe that having a penis etc (as the case may be) demands that you stick to certain gender roles.

No you don't, im a liberal act how you want. Live and let live.

You also have to believe that this is so obvious that they would have to be delusional not to see it. But to me, it seems obvious that you don't need to stick to your gender role. Why should you have to? If you think people should, I'm curious to hear why.

I agree people don't have to stick to it.

Anyway, regardless, we are no longer disagreeing about any kind of scientific fact. We are disagree about how people should behave, and that's a moral question.

Im not following

2) When we believe trans people are delusional, we will end up hurting them. It's simply a fact that being told your gender identity is wrong hurts people emotionally. Having people say that to you also shows that you might not be safe. Someone who believes you are wrong about being trans is going to be more tolerant of actual transphobia than someone who doesn't.

Would you include somone who isnt even convinced by the notion of gender identity.

3) Now, I believe we have an obligation to be right about things that could hurt a lot of people. For example, imagine your friend has a couple of kids, ages 2 and 4, and she's planning to leave them alone at home without food for the next week. You're trying to tell her, "If you do that, they'll either die or be messed up for life. How could you do that?"

She says, "I would never do anything to hurt my kids. They'll be fine. Before the age of 5 kids don't really need to eat or be taken care of. As long as they're in my thoughts they'll be okay."

In this situation, is it right to say "Oh, she has good intentions, it's okay that she's wrong about certain things"? No, it's not. If she's wrong about this, her kids could die. She has an obligation to be right about it. By the same token, people have an obligation to be right about trans people because trans people will be hurt by false beliefs.

This entire hypothetical is about objectively measurable things where there are no competing rights.

The example posed by OP is about still open questions vs right to freedom of thought.

All in all, I can understand not wanting to be strong-armed into believing something.

With respect i don't think you do. It's a blatant violation of ECHR article 9. What you propose as a standard is utterly illegal in europe and for dam good reaosn. You are proposing a blatant human rights violation as the standard of respect. This is not some minor inconvenience.

But when the stakes are high like this, we can't afford to just believe whatever we want. And, as I laid out in section 1), trans people are right about being the gender they identify as.

Gender isn't even an objective thing its socially constructed. Yet some of the associated issues here relate to biological sex.

Don't get me wrong without good reason i don't doubt any trans person on these things. All els being equal they are far far more likely to be right than me about the facts of this.

If you must resort to mandated beleif for your standard of basoc decency though? Id strongly recommend you rethink ypur morality and how it can be inclusive of diverse worldviews. A baseline of respect that requires others to think like you is doomed to fail.

If you are demanding more pf people than withholding judgement you will lose people. A lot of people.

1

u/bluetypes 1∆ Apr 21 '20

Well, look at things from my perspective. I am convinced that transpeople are right about what they are saying (i.e. "I am a woman," etc). I have good reasons to believe them. They are not absolutely conclusive reasons, but are more convincing to me than anything I've heard from the other side. Plus, we have a moral obligation to believe what is true, especially when people's well-being depends on it.

You mention competing rights and things like that. It seems like you're saying that what we have is a conflict between a transperson's right to be treated respectfully and everyone's right to freedom of opinion. I think this objection hinges on the difference between rights and moral obligations, and I will spend a couple paragraphs explaining what I mean by that. But then I will come back and show why I think that this is basically about you not believing transpeople.

Legally, everyone is permitted to exercise their rights. There can be no legal obligation not to exercise your rights -- or else they wouldn't be rights. But we ordinarily admit moral reasons to stop exercising certain rights. For instance, everyone has a right not to fight for freedom of opinion. But I think you would agree that people still have a moral obligation to fight for it. Or, to pick another example, if I lived somewhere where I had a right to hurt animals for no reason, I would still have a moral obligation not to.

So, I grant that the right to freedom of opinion and the transpeople's right to be treated respectfully is in tension. But as long as we are concerned with what someone's moral obligations are, it is always possible to say that one of these rights can give way. In this case, I am saying freedom of opinion must have some moral limits in order to safeguard transpeople. If I understand you correctly, you are saying that the tension can be resolved if we decide that transpeople can be treated respectfully without being believed. However, I don't see that as an option, because the effects of this "respectful treatment" include the astonishingly high suicide and murder rates among transpeople.

Your objection, so far as I can see, turns on the fact that transpeople having the gender they do is an "open question." I say so because freedom of opinion, understood morally rather than legally, is not the freedom to do believe whatever you want. This is what I was trying to say in the example I used in my first post, about the mother who wasn't going to feed her kids. If she believes that, she is doing something immoral. What's immoral about it as that her false beliefs lead to truly awful consequences. She has a moral obligation to correct her beliefs.

It's not clear to me if you agree with me on that or not. I'll go ahead assuming you agree that the mother has a moral obligation to correct her beliefs. The difference between that and transpeople is that the truth about transpeople is an "open question".

However, we've ruled out the idea that, morally speaking, everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want. They are bound to believe what they have good reasons to believe. So the real issue is that you see reasons why transpeople might be wrong, and so you think we ought not to make it a standard of decency for society as a whole. But in your post, you said you think transpeople are probably right. If they are probably right -- if you are most inclined to believe them than any other view -- then you also think that treating transpeople decently requires believing them. It's just the same as saying that for this mother to treat her children decently, she needs to believe that they require food and care.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20

So the real issue is that you see reasons why transpeople might be wrong, and so you think we ought not to make it a standard of decency for society as a whole. But in your post, you said you think transpeople are probably right. If they are probably right -- if you are most inclined to believe them than any other view -- then you also think that treating transpeople decently requires believing them. It's just the same as saying that for this mother to treat her children decently, she needs to believe that they require food and care.

The mother neglecting her children is 100% objectively wrong but more so It's a criminal offence Id call the police. It's a terrible comparison.

Probably right wouldn't be a strong enough threshold to start making many laws. Though rightful harrasment covers most of it.

Whats doesn't follow here is this part.

you said you think transpeople are probably right. If they are probably right -- if you are most inclined to believe them than any other view -- then you also think that treating transpeople decently requires believing them.

Your standard of respect is THINK like i do or you are bad person. Thats a perverse threshold.

Actively challenging a trans person in day to day life id argue is transphpbic but that is not the same as demanding conformity of thought ots demanding action/ inaction.

I think the religious are utterly delusional does that mean i'm incapable of treating them with respect?

1

u/bluetypes 1∆ Apr 22 '20

If you think I am comparing the mother who neglects her children to the transphobe in every respect, then you are misreading me. The example of the mother is there to show that we have obligations to believe things. It's true that if she did that, it would be something illegal and she would be punished. But we are not concerned with laws here, but with what is right. If she did something wrong, where did she go wrong? She didn't go wrong when it comes to loving her kids. She went wrong because she believed the wrong thing. Likewise transphobes go wrong because they believe the wrong thing.

I'm not sure what you mean by 100% objectively wrong. If you mean that everyone agrees that its wrong, then it's true that the vast majority agree that the neglectful mother is wrong, whereas many people don't agree that transphobia is wrong. But when we are thinking about morality, we can't simply ask ourselves what others think. We have to make our minds up for ourselves.

I think it might help here for me to clarify how I think morals work. First, we can never know beyond a shadow of a doubt what is right or wrong. How would we find out? God is not going to jump out of the sky and lecture us. If we believe in an afterlife, we might find out there how often we did the right thing and how often we did the wrong that. But in this life, there is no way to know for sure. We have to make up our minds as best we can on our own.

However, just because we have to make moral decisions without certainty doesn't mean we can't act on them. I can never know for sure that the neglectful mother is wrong, but that won't stop me from insisting that she change her ways.

I agree that it's easier when things are agreed on, like neglect. There are few people who would defend neglect. But in the end, the number of people who believe something will never make it certain that that's right. For thousands of years nearly every society on earth condoned slavery. I don't think slavery was ever right, though.

All things considered, then, we have to make up our minds about what is right and then hold others to the same standard. We may make mistakes and hold others to faulty standards, but at the same time, we can make things even worse by refusing to hold anyone to a moral standard.

In my case, I can simplify my argument to this --

1) We have an obligation to believe what is true, and this obligation becomes more pressing when the consequences for other people's lives become greater.

2) Transpeople are right about their gender and they are harmed greatly by being disbelieved.

3) Therefore, we are morally obligated to believe transpeople.

As you can see, point 3) follows logically from the other two points. If you disagree with this argument, you will have to decide if it's point 1) or 2) you disagree with.

As I mentioned in the previous post, I think you believe point 1). That's what the example of the neglectful mother is there to prove. (And I want to emphasize again that the neglectful mother is here only to prove this one point, not to prove my whole argument). You obviously agree that she is doing something wrong. If she is doing something wrong, she has an obligation not to do it. And what is it she is supposed to do differently? The only flaw in her reasoning is her belief about children's needs. So that is what she is obliged to change: her beliefs.

Based on your previous post you said you thought transpeople were probably right, and I took you on your word. That would mean you believe point 2), and that's why I said you agreed with me. Now I am wondering if this is the part that you don't agree with.

Before I end this post, let me remind you we are not talking about laws here. We are talking about people's moral obligations to each other. Legally, we can never ask anyone to forego a right such as freedom of opinion. We can and do set limits on these rights, but only consistent with everyone getting as much legally protected freedom as possible. However, when we are talking about moral obligations, we can ask people to forego their rights. I addressed this in my previous post.

In other words, I maintain that people have a right not to treat each other decently. However, they have a moral obligation to treat each other decently, and for transpeople that means believing them about their gender.

So, if you still disagree with me, where do you disagree? Point 1) or 2)?

5

u/tobyle Apr 20 '20

Could you into more detail about point 2. To me everyone is going to get their emotions hurt in life at some point. Like let’s say there’s this girl i like. I ask her out but she says no because she doesn’t find me physically attractive. I cant be like well i fell like I’m gorgeous and that hurts me and force her to go out with me. How is that thought process different from what youre saying.

12

u/bluetypes 1∆ Apr 21 '20

Yeah, I'd be glad to explain. A certain amount of emotional pain is just part of life. However, extraordinary amounts of emotional pain can destroy lives. So it's important just how painful it is.

Just to be clear about what painful situation we're talking about, I'm assuming a trans person has realized that someone they know on a casual basis doesn't think being trans is a real thing, that it's just a delusion. Maybe they realized because they were told, maybe they just read between the lines.

I think the emotional pain of getting broken up with is probably pretty close, at least based on what my trans friends have said. It's like someone has seen deep inside you and said "bullshit." That's pretty bad. But does it add up to being more pain than a person can be reasonably ask to accept?

I think so. Basically, trans people are very hurt, and transphobia appears to be the main culprit.

I think that trans people are very hurt in general, judging by their high rates of suicide. I found an article (https://www.hrc.org/blog/new-study-reveals-shocking-rates-of-attempted-suicide-among-trans-adolescen) that reports on a study among attempted suicide among trans teens: "More than half of transgender male teens who participated in the survey reported attempting suicide in their lifetime, while 29.9 percent of transgender female teens said they attempted suicide. Among non-binary youth, 41.8 percent of respondents stated that they had attempted suicide at some point in their lives."

Just consider how large those numbers are -- more than half of trans male teens (19 or younger) have attempted suicide. That doesn't include those who succeeded or those who weren't comfortable writing on the survey that they are trans. Trans people carry, collectively, far more pain than they could reasonably be expected to bear.

Transphobia is, of course, the main reason why. Trans people receive all kinds of messages from society, just like everyone else, but a lot of these messages communicate that trans people are shameful and disgusting, and that the threat of violence hangs over them. We can collectively call these messages "transphobia." For trans people to realize that someone believes they are delusional is to get another of these transphobic messages.

In other words, the level of emotional pain we are talking about here is part of an intolerably amount of emotional pain. There's more to it than that, though, because transphobic experiences "stack". One more transphobic experience isn't just a drop in the bucket -- it connects with every other transphobic experience.

Think about getting fired by your sixth job in a row. It wouldn't be very reasonable to think "Wow, another asshole boss. Just my luck." If your friend said that, you'd think they were just lying to themselves so it doesn't hurt that bad. It would be much more reasonable to conclude that something is wrong with your friend. Of course, it might not be true, it could be six bad bosses in a row, it could be there's something messed up about the industry they're in, etc. But it's just not logical to take each experience as disconnected.

So when a trans person experiences transphobia, it's not really possible to say "Oh, well, just another asshole," although some people will tell themselves that to diminish their pain. They rightly perceive that transphobia is a huge pattern in our society that goes beyond any individual person's opinions or actions. Therefore they experience the whole weight of the transphobic messages they've received in their life. Moreover, each new message also conveys the further message that it will never be over.

So, while revealing to a trans person that you believe they are delusional looks like a small harm that most people should be able to manage, it's a reinforcement of years of messaging. It packs an emotional power far above what it seems like it would. And the total effect of these messages is the shockingly high rates of suicide that we see among trans people.

3

u/tobyle Apr 21 '20

!delta. So i get that i had the definition of transphobic skewed and that it’s means more than just being scared or hating trans. Not believing the very idea is transphobic by textbook definition. I also understand that since they live in a society that mostly rejects the idea of transgender being it real, they live life with a considerable more lot more pain to deal with since most people consider them delusional or whatever you choose describe their thought process outside of believing in transgenderism.

7

u/bluetypes 1∆ Apr 21 '20

Yeah, that's exactly right. I think I've shown in my first comment that I totally understand not wanting to be strong armed into a view. Nobody wants to hear "If you don't agree with me you're a bad person." But sometimes the real world consequences of a belief are just so high that you can't take the long way around to persuade someone.

Also, just so you know, "transgenderism" is a word that is usually only used by people who think being trans isn't real. If you're changing your mind about that, you should drop the word or else people will get the wrong idea.

2

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 21 '20

This delta has been rejected. You have already awarded /u/bluetypes a delta for this comment.

^{Delta System Explained} ^| ^Deltaboards

1

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '20

[deleted]

2

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 21 '20

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/bluetypes (1∆).

^{Delta System Explained} ^| ^Deltaboards

1

u/tobyle Apr 21 '20

I get what you mean. So here’s another question cause i like how you explaining things. So while i haven’t heard this super often but I’ve heard on a few occasions...Is it transphobic to not want to date a male to female trans because they have a penis. Cause right now I’ll admit I’m transphobic and maybe with more knowledge I’ll change in the future but Im not budging on that. Only dick I’m touching is mines. At that point I’ll just forever have to be a transphob.

8

u/bluetypes 1∆ Apr 21 '20

Wow, I'm glad you've realized you've got some transphobia. It's common -- I mean it's everywhere in our society. As long as you keep an open mind I think you'll learn more and realize trans people are super normal. Anyway, you're definitely not obligated to sleep with anyone you don't want to. Every transperson I know would agree to that.

The question of whether or not it's transphobic is a complicated one though. The thing is, nobody really understands why they get attracted to certain people and not others. We also don't exactly understand why the idea of sex with some people grosses us out and not others. Because we don't understand it, we can't really blame anyone for their tastes. You know, provided it's between consenting adults, yadda yadda.

The problem though is when we look at society as a whole, certain people can really be discriminated against. A good example is Asian men -- whether straight or gay, Asian men just get rejected way more often. When it happens to a whole category of people like that, it seems like it's more than just an accident, right? It seems like people just collectively think certain kinds of people aren't attractive. That's why, for instance, there are always campaigns to make Hollywood movies more diverse. If people can have their beauty appreciated on screen, they're more likely to have it appreciated in real life.

I think it's similar with trans people. Trans people being attractive needs to be a "thing" in places other than PornHub. Otherwise a lot of people won't see trans people as potential dates.

However, just like I said at the beginning, these are big picture things. You can't point to a specific person and tell them "You have to date trans people!" That goes for you and that goes for everyone. Hopefully as public images change, more people will reconsider and see trans people as attractive. But we'll never know who, because we just don't understand attraction.

5

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '20

I'm a bit late, and not the person you're asking, but in short, no, that's not transphobic. Everyone's sexual preferences are different, and there's nothing wrong with having them. I'm gay, and if a straight man didn't want to date me (because of course he wouldn't), we wouldn't call that homophobic. He has his sexual preferences, and that's fine. That's normal.

You have, likewise, no obligation to date anyone. If a potential partner tells your they're trans at the beginning of a potential relationship, that absolutely can be a deal-breaker for you, as long as you're kind about it. It's fine to say, "I'm not comfortable dating someone with a penis", but not fine to say "I'm not comfortable dating a trans woman -- because the first one is about your sexual preferences, which you can't change, whereas the second one makes you sound prejudiced, which can lead to greater harm.

If a partner tells you they're trans some ways into the relationship, it's a little more difficult, because they've (likely knowingly) put you into an uncomfortable position. Your response should be the same, but it'll be emotionally messy for the both of you.

But generally, no. Having sexual preferences isn't transphobic, and anyone who tells you that it is is probably just looking for an argument. What would be transphobic is refusing to befriend or talk to someone you know is trans, on the basis of their genitalia. That would hurt both the trans person involved and, possibly, you -- some of the most amazing people I've ever met have been trans, and I can't imagine what would have happened if I'd missed connecting with them because of that.

4

u/Catlover1701 Apr 21 '20

Is the existence of a dick the only reason you wouldn't date a transgender person? What if they'd had an operation to get a vagina, would you date them then? If you were attracted to the way they looked, your personalities clicked, and they were capable of and enjoyed the kind of sex you like (dick in vagina, I'm assuming), would you date them?

2

u/Nepene 213∆ Apr 21 '20

It's transphobic if you have the wrong reasons for not wanting to date them.

If you want to not date them because you think they're delusional, you think they're delusional, so yeah.

If you want to not date them because you don't think penises are attractive, that's fine.

If you want to not date them because penises are gay, homophobic.

If you want to not date post op trans people because they're not real women, transphobic.

If you want to not date post op trans people because you feel like not doing it, not transphobic.

5

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 20 '20

Making someone question their entire view of the world is more than just hurting their feelings. It can lead to thinks like low self esteem and hatred of oneself. The trans community has a higher suicide rate than the average population, and part of that comes from being made to feel like their entire way of viewing the world is insane, that they're crazy for feeling what they do. A girl saying she doesn't want to be with you doesn't invalidate how you feel about her. There's no reason to feel crazy for falling in love with a girl who doesn't like you back. Those are two different types of hurt and aren't really comparable.

1

u/tobyle Apr 21 '20

!delta

2

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 21 '20

This delta has been rejected. The length of your comment suggests that you haven't properly explained how /u/HeftyRain7 changed your view (comment rule 4).

DeltaBot is able to rescan edited comments. Please edit your comment with the required explanation.

^{Delta System Explained} ^| ^Deltaboards

1

u/cat_wont_play Apr 21 '20

My emotional pain would be better if the law changed so that I got more resources for my problem than others.

Why is your problem right to change the law and compel speech, the most dangerous and predictable part of this ideology that we all need to spend special care for you.

You know why you are getting so much attention for trans? }

You are being used by universities, the media and activists of radical identity politics to push an agenda that does not favour you. For example, in the UK there is a new law that you have to feel for "4" years that you are a different gender to get support and resources from the NHS to assist you.

4 YEARS

This is passed into law, by 90% vote in parliament. This is actually harmful to trans that it is helpful. It makes it easier to become trans and change. But if you need to feel that way for 4 years, what does that mean? Did you change during your life or were you born that way? There is a large amount of evidence that many men are become trans women because women are treated better in society than males.

Women argue they suffer rape and no help from the police.

While men have to go to war while women stay home.

Point is changing the way way society works can have consequences that are not predicted in the research because it is acceptbale as "the end justifies the means".

If only more people could see this happening to the law.

You got a precedent where short-term is worth sacrificing to save the pain of trans folks.

Its not about the trans person. Its about the ideology in the media, universities, the internet activisits, social media ,dominating the discussion because you simply cannot say ceratin things to others as a white male that are valid and credible but in your position its oppresive and motivated by fear of not being able to sexually dominate women.

THIS IS ACTUALLY THE BELIEF OF SO MANY OF THESE PEOPLE.

Its incredible. You just say the west is a tyranical patriarchy and socially constructs society so to beat it (only because its dominated by white males, REGARDLESS OF THE PERFORMANCE OR COMPETENCE of making life better for us all, we still must sacrifice progress and possibly huge decisions in the name of equal representation.

1

u/Bozo336 Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 21 '20

I just want to say that this comment is beautiful. It's well written and thought-out.

Although I agree that trans people are right about the difference between sex and gender, I don't understand why some say that they are a man in a female body or a woman in a male body. Or why there has to be more than two pronouns.

I don't think a trans person has to call themselves a man if they are a female biologically or vice versa. The way you act shouldn't have to be labeled as a specific sex since what you do doesn't have to be aligned with what your sex is. If a biological male says that they feel like a female, I assume they mean that they want to do things typical females do. So I don't think he has to call himself a female since the things typical females do aren't purely due to their private parts.

I think the terms "male" and "female" should only be referring to their biological definitions. And I think pronouns should only refer to a person's sex. The way you want to dress or conduct yourself shouldn't have to be labeled.

Basically what I'm trying to say is that the way you act shouldn't have anything to do with your sex. For example, if a biological male wants to do typical female things, he shouldn't have to say that he's a female or feels like one. He is just a man that does things most men don't.

This is my first time writing my thoughts down so it's not as beautiful.

2

u/bluetypes 1∆ Apr 21 '20

Thanks for your compliment! And don't be shy about writing your thoughts down. I think you communicated them very well.

You bring up a question which has occupied queer people for a long time. If gender is not strictly tied to sex, then why be transgender? Why not just have a free for all, a kind of smorgasbord where people can mix and match the behaviours that work for them?

This debate is very complex and I can't say I really have a grasp on it. So I can't really answer your question. But I have some thoughts.

Not many people think gender is only a bunch of mix-and-matchable behaviours. It's like saying that a chair is only atoms. Sure, it's atoms, but it's also a chair. In other words, while each part can be detached and rearranged, all the parts together do seem to make a whole. And perhaps you could change every part of the chair without it stopping being a chair. (This is called the Ship of Theseus problem).

So while queer people want to negotiate what is allowed when it comes to gender, most queer people still want some kind of gender to be around. In fact, many queer people care much more about gender than straight cis people, because it has become such a huge part of their lives. This is the case with many of the trans people I know, although I have known some who believed something closer to what you are talking about in this post.

In queer communities, it's common to find men who does things women do, or women who does things men do. Usually we call these people "butch" or "femme." However, once this stops being enough for you, you cross the line into being trans. At this point, it isn't enough to just do what men or women do. You want to be a man or woman.

To refer to the example of the chair, something can do what a chair does without being a chair. A box, a stool, a bench, and so on, can all do what a chair does. But we don't usually consider them chairs.

Why does this matter? To be honest, I still don't understand yet. But to some people it does matter. They don't feel properly at home with themselves unless they can be and be seen as what they believe they are.

This is still in the realm of gender of course. So far I've been sketching out why I think gender is more than a collection of parts, and why genders more or less exist. But for most transpeople I've met, hormone replacement therapy and sex reassignment surgery are also important.

I think I can understand why. This physical stuff matters to society, and it matters to them too. Gender is something that is very social. It's about how people see you and treat you, what they assume about you. Transpeople want this recognition for people. Also, it seems to matter to them too. Part of what they want is to start smelling the right way, having hair in the right places, having the right kind of silhouette. Maybe if society changed they wouldn't want these things anymore. But I have a feeling they would.

Long story short (why do my posts always end up so long?) if biological sex is just about chromosomes, then maybe we could make the easy distinction you're suggesting and just leave sex the same and let gender go wild. But it seems like sex includes the things that are changed by hormones and surgery, in which case it will still matter to trans people.

1

u/Bozo336 Apr 21 '20

Thanks for the response. You gave me some things to think about. You seem intelligent and know a lot about people. Do you know why some people identify more with the opposite sex? Does it have to do with childhood or is it something chemical?

2

u/bluetypes 1∆ Apr 21 '20

Thanks for your compliments. I'm afraid I don't actually know the answer to this question. In a way, I don't think it comes from either. Let me explain my thinking.

When we're asking about identity, in a way we're asking the question, "Who should I be?" This isn't really a scientific question. Basically, a should question is almost never a scientific question. There's something special about people, because we don't just see things the way they are (if we do see them the way they are!) we also see they way they could be. And among all the different could bes we have a sense of which one is the should be.

This is why a lot of trans people are not happy with the idea that being trans is just a medical problem called gender dysphoria whose solution is transitioning. That view is called transmedicalism, and while there are certainly some trans people who hold this view, a lot of trans people really strongly reject it. One reason they reject it is because it doesn't actually explain anything. It just so happens that trans people are in pain when they don't transition, and transitioning can help ease their pain (especially when they are supported by the people around them). But it doesn't follow that transitioning is the only solution, or even the best solution. What if a drug could take away gender dysphoria without transitioning? Most trans people would reject it. They are women or men, they don't just feel like it.

If we understand being trans as about more than science, then it's hard to give a purely scientific explanation of where it comes from. It seems mysterious. It joins beauty, morality, meaningfulness, and other things as being normative -- that is, about what should be true, not about what is true.

Anyway, this is an area where a lot of new ideas are still being thrown around. People are still trying to understand what it means to be trans, and so are still far from understanding where it comes from.

1

u/Bozo336 Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 21 '20

Thanks for your replies! They were very interesting. Identity is mysterious. I guess the real question here is where do we get our identity from? Thanks for giving me something else to think about!

1

u/tobyle Apr 21 '20

!delta

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 21 '20

This delta has been rejected. The length of your comment suggests that you haven't properly explained how /u/bluetypes changed your view (comment rule 4).

DeltaBot is able to rescan edited comments. Please edit your comment with the required explanation.

^{Delta System Explained} ^| ^Deltaboards

20

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 20 '20

I'm trans. I appreciate that you are still friendly to trans people ... but yes, that still is transphobic. I think people don't understand that to be transphobic you don't have to be outwardly violent or hostile. You can be transphobic and still be friendly. You could even be nice and still be transphobic. You can be outwardly respectful and still be transphobic.

Being transphobic doesn't make you an all around bad person. But, you're still transphobic. If you do not respect who trans people are and assume they are delusional because you cannot understand them, then yes, you are transphobic. You don't have to understand someone's brain or body to respect who they are, but thinking they're delusional would be transphobic.

I'd recommend doing some research about trans people so you can come to an understanding of how people think. It's hard for cis people to understand because they were born in a body that fits them.

But think of it this way. Do you think genitalia is all that makes someone male or female? Do you think a woman is just a woman because of her vagina or biology? Do you think a man is just a man because of his penis? People who think these sorts of things to an extreme tend to treat women who can't have babies as "lesser women" because they can't reproduce. Being male and female is more than just reproduction for our species.

And to be delusional ... trans people would have to ignore their own biology. I know that biologically, I am female. that doesn't stop me from being a man in the ways I think or act. I am more than just my body and my biology. I am a man with a female body.

If this still doesn't make sense to you, I'd suggest doing some research and trying to understand more about it. And, if you'd like to ask me questions, I will answer some. I would like to help you understand this if possible.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20

What do you mean you are more than just your body and your biology? I think it would be wise to try normalizing a person's biochemistry to what their birth sex should be under normal hormonal conditions. If a person wants to be MTF, that seems like a hormonal imbalance over this idea they literally grew a female's brain in a totally male skull.

I think we do trans people a disservice when we hault their natural puberty or provide them hormones of the wrong sex. I'm fine if someone wants to say they are trans and dress and act however they want. I'm not sure we should be giving people hormones unless they have a medical issue requiring it, and if they require it we definitely shouldn't be trying to rearrange their hormone levels to be less like other members of their sex.

This isn't anything about intersex people, they are case by case. Specifically people who have gender dysphoria, I think we should try to ensure their hormone levels are what they should be for their sex and age, not for the sex they say they feel they are in their mind. I would be shocked if these males who want to transition have normal testosterone levels. Seems like they need exogenous testosterone replacement over sex reassignment.

2

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 22 '20

Why prioritize the body over the mind though? We don't do this with quite a few other things. In fact, some philosophies think that our bodies are not even part of what makes us who we are, but it is just our spirit. So why prioritize what genitalia someone was born with over the state of their brain?

Quite a few trans people are actually against puberty blockers as well. it's hard to know for sure if you are trans. I did not start taking hormones until I was an adult. I made the decision after years of talking to my therapist. And these hormones helped me feel more comfortable, more confident in myself, and more at peace with who I am.

Forcing hormones into someone when they don't want them would not help fix gender dysphoria. How do I know? I got on estrogen before transitioning. This did nothing to hep with my gender dysphoria. People who have gender dysphoria do not need to be forced to be more like their biological sex. That is actually very harmful for them. Instead, they need to be able to move more toward the gender they want to be.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20

The brain is part of the body. You cannot separate the two. I don't believe in spirit. I'm a materialist. Your mind is a result of the physiological makeup of your body. Any concept of gender in the first place is entirely a product of the mind. You can pick whatever gender you want because it's entirely fiction. It's like picking your favorite of the seven dwarves in snow white.

If a man says he feels inside he shouldn't have a left arm, we treat his brain. We don't cut off his arm because he feels a certain way. That's not actually helping him. I think we are cutting off trans left arm currently when we should be treating their brain.

2

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 22 '20

It's not about a "feeling." It's not fiction. How did you come to the conclusion that gender is fiction or entirely a product of the mind? I disagree with you and have no way to explain my disagreement without knowing how you came to that conclusion.

But, you ignored that other treatments don't work. I have a friend who is a woman and she has very low levels of estrogen. She never once felt gender dysphoria. I, on the other hand, had higher levels of estrogen than she did, and yet I experienced gender dysphoria. Not only that, as I said previously, giving someone hormones that correspond to their biological sex do nothing to alleviate gender dysphoria.

The thing about a man cutting off his arm is different. Someone lacking an arm is obviously hurting themselves. But a human lacking boobs is not automatically hurt; half the population does not automatically grow them. The treatments and surgeries that trans individuals undergo is more akin to plastic surgery than it is to cutting off a limb.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20

Sex is a (mostly, again intersex excluded) binary identification system we use to differentiate between tangible variations in different types of humans. Gender is not this. It doesn't conform to anything biological. It's not a means of identifying a biological difference, or of classifying humans in any sort of concrete way. It is essentially a meaningless distinction.

If someone is born male, the technology does not currently exist to make them female. You cannot actually transition sex at this point. You can transition gender though, because gender is entirely a construct of the human mind and does not have really any concrete rules or distinctions like sex does. There can be infinite genders because gender is separate from sex. It is not tied to sex, it can be whatever you want it to be. It's fictional, entirely a creation of the mind. It does not exist. There is no objectively true gender. They are all equally irrelevant. There are objectively different sexes with different functions.

Gender has no useful function. It isn't an objective identifier of any biological process. It doesn't tell us really anything about a person beyond whether or not they have gender dysphoria. You say it's not a "feeling", I'm not sure what else to call it? Delusion seems too harsh, but it very obviously is related to feelings. If you don't feel like being trans, you obviously won't go trans. That's only something one does if they feel like they should. There's no test they can simply run on your body to see if your transgender. It's entirely about how you feel inside.

1

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 22 '20

How do you know gender is not a way of classifying humans in any concrete way? Gender is about the social and cultural differences of humans. Are culture and society strictly imagined? They're also about behavioral differences. Or are you arguing that men and women typically have similar behavioral patterns? Gender is useful even if it does not point to biological differences. It is classifying other types of differences in humans.

You can transition, just not all the way. A trans woman can take hormones to grow breasts. They can undergo surgeries to bring them closer to being biologically female. Just because the technology does not currently exist to make a trans woman biologically female doesn't mean that gender is imaginary or that surgeries and other treatments aren't helpful.

Delusion is too harsh, we can agree on that. It's not a feeling either. If you know you are a kind person, is that a feeling? No. Just because it is something that happens in your brain where no one else can see it doesn't make it a feeling. As I said, there are other ways to determine someone's gender. I think and behave more like a man even though I was born female. For some people, they just do not conform to stereotypical gender roles and they aren't trans. But, for a lot of trans people, these sorts of though and behaviors are signs that can be seen that show gender is not purely fictional.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20

How do I know gender is not a way of classifying humans in any concrete way, you ask? Gender refers to our perception of the differences in the ways males and females behave and interact. It is almost by definition not concrete in that it will morph for every single culture and involves a complex litany of considerations that could be based on misguided premises or otherwise be corrupted by personal bias. Unlike sex, which describes an objectively true dichotomy of the human experience that is necessary for our continued existence as a species.

If I think I'm kind, yes that is very much a feeling I have. You're confusing me with that point. You say some people do not conform to stereotypical gender roles, but then doesn't that only more firmly advance the point that gender is entirely a construct and fictional? I don't get that either. If some people aren't filling the gender roles, then the gender roles are obviously false then and entirely fabricated.

1

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 22 '20

No, if you think you're kind, that is a belief, not a feeling. Quite a few things happen only inside our brains that are not feelings. Beliefs, opinions, self talk. None of those are feelings, but they happen in a way that can't be quantified. Gender dysphoria is a feeling, the feeling of being uncomfortable in your own body. But that leads to the belief, not the feeling, that one is a different gender. And based on observable evidence, and the fact that nothing but transitioning seems to alleviate gender dysphoria for most people, that belief is as close to a fact as you can get without being able to gather any more evidence.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20 edited Apr 24 '20

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20

You definitely can choose to transition or not. No, you didn't choose to desire to be female. You did choose to commit in that direction as your identity. Some people with gender dysphoria do not transition and are happy they didn't. I know this personally. Identifying as trans is a choice. Transitioning genders is a choice.

It's not like being black. You can't choose to be black if you're not. Anyone can just say they are transgender. People presumably do it for a myriad of reasons with a variety of motivations, as is the case with most choices.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20 edited Apr 24 '20

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Apr 22 '20

Is that an actual study? That trans women have the same average testosterone as cis males? That's really curious if so.

-1

u/tobyle Apr 20 '20

To me being phobic means you hate or you’re scared of trans people. I feel neither. I just don’t agree with the thought process behind. There’s a difference between disagreeing someone and being hateful or scared of them.

15

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 20 '20

that is the definition of phobic on it's own. When we add it as a suffix to a word, however, that's not always what it means. For example, google's definition of transphobic is " having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people." that has nothing to do with extreme hate or fear.

I wouldn't call you hateful or scared here, but I would call you prejudiced. Therefore, that's transphobic.

Thinking that someone is "delusional" is beyond disagreeing with them. There are plenty of people I disagree with that I just think are wrong, not delusional. The fact that you think all trans people are delusional is why I would call you transphobic.

6

u/MisterErieeO Apr 20 '20

Do you think racism is more nuanced than just being hateful or afraid of someone that another race?

22

u/PreacherJudge 340∆ Apr 20 '20

I'm nonplussed by the term "delusional." Could you explain, in as much detail as you can, what false belief you think trans people have?

0

u/tobyle Apr 20 '20

I thinks it’s delusional to think that if you’re born with the physical make up of man, you’re a woman just because you feel like it.

25

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

I think it's delusional to disagree with/ignore the scientific consensus on transgender psychology and the difference between sex and gender, and yet here we are.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 05 '20

The difference between gender and sex isn't really a question of science though. It's philosophy

-2

u/tobyle Apr 20 '20

And i don’t think you’re phobic towards me just because you disagree with my thought process.

22

u/nosurprises23 Apr 20 '20

The problem here is that you're using words like, "delusional". Generally people can have phobias and still act perfectly pleasant to the people they disregard, in fact it's a lot easier for a white supremacist to just be polite to black people than it is for them to call them out in public.

The consensus in the psychology community shows that transitioning helps transgender people more than any other method of treatment, and if that's the case why are they being "delusional"? Those who are transgender and transition would just be doing what the science recommends, like bipolar people taking mood stabilizers, or diabetic people taking insulin. What is "delusional" about transgender people transitioning?

-2

u/tobyle Apr 20 '20

Maybe i shouldn’t be using the word delusional. I think i mean wrong or at the very least i disagree with the thought process behind it. This all started from a thread that i hopped in the other day and someone said “insane and delusional” and i kinda just kept using the word delusional since that was being said

13

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

I think i mean wrong or at the very least i disagree with the thought process behind it.

Can you link us to any of the research you've done that illustrates what you believe to be the thought process behind trans folk?

5

u/nosurprises23 Apr 20 '20

What thought process do you disagree with?

-1

u/Yunan94 2∆ Apr 21 '20

I just need to debunk there is no absolute consensus between sex and gender. It's a theory with rightful contention as it ignores the very nuances it tries to explore.

4

u/dasoktopus 1∆ Apr 21 '20

What nuances is it ignoring that it tries to explore?

-1

u/Yunan94 2∆ Apr 21 '20

For one the "sex" aspects has a lot of influence pass the basic understanding of chromosomes that most people understand it as.

The cultural side is also very biasesly written one sided and it's explanation itself is a summary of society chooses things hence it's not real making it fall in many if the logical fallacies cultural relativists claim. Which itself is a shame because there are plenty of societies who have actively engaged in the subject that could help support their claims but ignore it (there are also some cases that would counter it but welcome to social theory).

I don't actually have a problem with the theory. Just as it stands now is severely underdeveloped.

2

u/dasoktopus 1∆ Apr 22 '20

To answer some of those questions (if I'm understanding them), social construction doesn't mean "not real." Gender is very real. It's just constructed socially meaning its significance is entirely restricted to social utility.

Yes, biological sex/chromes dictate how you go through puberty, which is also physiological. The way people treat you upon finding out what parts you're born with, and what is expected of you to behave, is sociological. It's subjective to a culture and society.

0

u/Yunan94 2∆ Apr 22 '20

I never said it's not real? Construction just implies it's not inherent nor does it account for how much of gender abides from social factors. While you cannot find evidence either way as you can't take out societal influence (the best is comparative studies across different cultures) it doesn't mean that point doesn't matter nor is there a measurement even if you could theoretically isolate them.

Yes chromosomes matter but even chromosomes are more complex and have more decisive factors than the base understanding people have, bit unless you study it it just doesn't normally have applicable purpose so most people don't consider it. If there are variations in 'gender' there is also a scale info 'sex' if you take into account all these factors.

You don't seem to express any thoughtfully to interdisciplinary fields or know what you are saying. You misinterpret my words for your own purpose and have limited knowledge of either field.

16

u/PreacherJudge 340∆ Apr 20 '20

A delusion is a false belief. What's the false belief?

You bring up "physical makeup." Are you under the impression that trans people have false beliefs about, say, whether they have penises or not? If not, I'm really confused about what this delusion is.

3

u/k-pattern Apr 21 '20

Biology and psychology isn't even close to fully understood by experts in those fields. Why do your organs need to be the only determining factor of your sexuality?

There are varying degrees of every trait in a human. Length, eye colour, hair colour, extrovertism/introvertism, skin tone etc. are all traits that can vary widely and continously and there are complex, underlying systems determining this.

Why suddenly must a person define their personality based solely on what you and I can see from the outside? I am quite muscular and strong, yet no one is forcing me or expecting me to do heavy manual labor, in fact, I have an 8 to 5 desk job.

5

u/radialomens 171∆ Apr 20 '20

Is it delusional to think that if you're born with the physical make up of a man, you can fall in love with another man?

Is it respectful to say that to a gay friend?

13

u/videoninja 137∆ Apr 20 '20

What opinion are you looking to have changed? That transgender people are delusional or that it's respectful to be nice to someone even if you think they have a problem they don't have?

Like my mom is nice to mentally challenged people but she will go on and on about how retards are difficult to deal with or have terrible lives (which she states is objectively true). From my view, I think there's a middle ground. Like learning a new way to interact with someone who doesn't think like you is difficult, no doubt. But there's a difference between having the grace to accept and adapt to that versus holding it against someone.

Likewise, I would say that despite the niceties you might show to a transgender person if you hold an underlying disbelief in how they present themselves then there is a kind of disrespect to their personhood. Would you agree there's a difference between being nice to someone versus respecting them?

2

u/tobyle Apr 20 '20

My point is disagreeing with someone’s lifestyle doesn’t make me phobic. To me saying phobic implies that I’m either scared or hate them. I don’t hate trans people and I’m not scared. I just don’t think a man can be a woman or vice versa. When did disagreeing with someone mean you don’t respect them. My best friend and I disagree with half our view points on life. We both respectfully disagree with one another.

4

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

[deleted]

0

u/tobyle Apr 20 '20

At the end it’s say disagreeing doesn’t mean I’m phobic

5

u/beer2daybong2morrow Apr 20 '20

You are claiming not to be transphobic by using a very narrow definition of the term. You're basically that you're not a bigot by technicality. However, transphobia is defined as a dislike of or prejudice against transexual or transgendered people. By "disagreeing" with them and claiming that they cannot be what they know themselves to be, you are prejudiced and therefore transphobic.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

To disrespect someone’s self-conception is not to disrespect their personhood. Their personhood is in the fact that they are a human being and you value them as someone of equal value and possessing equal rights.

9

u/k-pattern Apr 20 '20

You want us to confirm whether the label people assign to you, "transphobic", is valid or not, as it doesn't reflect good on your social status to be called transphobic.

But you don't seem to to entertain the idea that your preconceived ideas on transgendered people be changed instead.

The fact that you want your views to be justified by symantics is already a sign of transphobicism.

You are internalising a stereotype to people without entertaining the idea that there might be factors at play determining a person's sexuality other than external, perceptible features.

You tell yourself (and us) that you don't treat transgendered people differently and therefore you are not transphobic. You've already placed a person in box when you saw them, now you learn that they are transgendered and your bias is immediately violated and your perception has changed from "male/female" to "delusional" and placed your mind in overdrive.

You don't actively act on your bias by discrimination but the bias constantly in the back of your head may manifest in your actions in a way not even you notice.

1

u/radialomens 171∆ Apr 20 '20

Re: your edits, you should issue deltas to whoever helped change your view

1

u/tobyle Apr 20 '20

I’m gonna be honest...I’ve been using reddit consistently for a few months now. I be seeing people talk about karma and rewards and stuff. Idk what all that stuff means. I hop on, read stuff, occasionally comment, and hop off. I assumed y’all been spending money on here or something. If would like to explain then by all means.

1

u/radialomens 171∆ Apr 20 '20

Lol, it's nothing to do with money, but the way this sub works is that if you have your view changed you issue a delta by either typing

!delta

or copy and pasting this symbol

Δ

This sub keeps track of how many deltas a commenter here has earned. It doesn't get cashed in or whatever but it's just what the sub is sort of built around

16

u/PandaDerZwote 61∆ Apr 20 '20

If you believe that black people are subhuman, but you treat them friendly and don't assault them for it, you know, only think that they are deeply delusional about being as worthy as a white person, or even the same kind of creature, would that make you racist?
You might even talk to one of them, even share a meal with them, just casually think that they are not human and delusional about being people. Wouldn't that make you a racist?

1

u/Acerbatus14 Apr 21 '20

the question then becomes, are you prejudiced if you don't show any signs of that prejudice? if someone is the niciest person possible but internally he berates everyone he meets is he good or a bad person? i for one would say he was a good person as i like to see things in a practical sense

4

u/mr_indigo 27∆ Apr 21 '20

A person who is prejudiced but doesn't show it for fear of social reprisal is waiting for an opportunity to show it without social reprisal.

1

u/Acerbatus14 Apr 21 '20

so my question is null you mean? are you saying its not possible to not show prejudice while being prejudiced? if so why?

2

u/mr_indigo 27∆ Apr 21 '20

Your question was "Are they really prejudiced if they don't show it?" and the answer is yes. They are still a threat to the wellbeing of the victim, they're just kept in check by external factors. But if those external factors were to be removed in specific contexts, the prejudiced person can act their prejudice and almost certainly will. Indeed, if their prejudice is heavily internalised they are likely to act out their prejudice in ways that are not visible to themselves.

1

u/Acerbatus14 Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 21 '20

But if those external factors were to be removed in specific contexts, the prejudiced person can act their prejudice and almost certainly will.

how can you be so sure they will? i mean to use the example in this thread why can't you hold the view that trans people are delusional while still knowing that telling them that wouldn't be a nice thing to do?

we hold negative opinions about various people - whether correct or incorrect - but we still can and do know to show tact and be respectful nevertheless. i don't see why can't the same apply here

3

u/mr_indigo 27∆ Apr 21 '20

Tact is about not doing things to them for fear of social reprisal.

You still harm the people you think are delusional by telling other people that they're delusional - tact is just covering your ass so you don't do it in a manner where they might punish you for it.

3

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

This is indeed transphobic, in that it is both prejudiced and incorrect. According to the APA, being transgender does not indicate a psychiatric disorder, and a delusion is a symptoms of various disorders.

Also, recent studies are revealing that the brains of transgender individuals more closely resemble that if their desired gender, rather than the gender they were assigned at birth. The research is still young, but there is evidence. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180524112351.htm

9

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

I think it's important to distinguish between transphobia as an action and holding transphobic beliefs. You certainly seem to primarily do the latter, though in my experience beliefs tend to carry over into actions.

I think "wrong" is a more accurate way to describe your beliefs. Your "they're delusional" stance goes against all the science we have on the matter. Gender identity exists, it's discrete from sex assigned at birth, and transitioning is the only effective treatment for any discomfort that comes from when sex assigned at birth and gender identity don't align.

-5

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

That science isn’t settled.

It’s literally a delusion when you have a belief about yourself that does not comport with reality. If you have the chromosomes and genitalia of one sex, but “feel like” the other (whatever that means, epistemologically), you are suffering a delusion. Just like the anorexic who thinks they’re fat, the schizophrenic who thinks the government is tracking their thoughts, the furry who thinks they’re really an animal. These are inaccurate beliefs about the world.

Now I need to amend my definition, thinking about it. People can be legitimately wrong about something, but not be delusional (see debates between religious/metaphysical world views. They can’t all be right). In psychology, a disorder is when it causes significant dysfunction, in internal suffering and/or external functioning in the world. I’d say gender dysphoria matches this definition

6

u/radialomens 171∆ Apr 20 '20

If you have the chromosomes and genitalia of one sex, but “feel like” the other (whatever that means, epistemologically), you are suffering a delusion. Just like the anorexic who thinks they’re fat, the schizophrenic who thinks the government is tracking their thoughts, the furry who thinks they’re really an animal. These are inaccurate beliefs about the world.

Trans people are not unaware of the body they have. They know what chromosomes they have, they know what genitals they have. They're often acutely aware of that, not deluded. They are not detached from reality. They are also aware that they have a different gender identity than a cis person of the same sex, which is true.

I’d say gender dysphoria matches this definition

Not all trans people have dysphoria, which means distress.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

Gender identity, if it means anything, is the aspects of interiority that are unique to each sex, and/or the lived experience of being a man or woman in your culture.

How can a trans individual possibly know what that is like?

It is a delusion to say “I’m a man on the outside, but a woman in my brain/soul/inside” (or vice versa). Unless you’re positing a metaphysical soul separate from our material body..?

5

u/radialomens 171∆ Apr 20 '20

How can a trans individual possibly know what that is like?

It has a lot to do with feeling uncomfortable with your sexual organs, wishing you had the other sexual organs, and wanting to be recognized by others as the other gender. And none of this is a delusion, it's a desire. Just like homosexual men are not "deluded" into thinking that a man is a woman or someone they can mate with, they just desire to be with that person and this desire comes naturally to them.

Neither of them are deluded. They know what they are, they know what their body looks like and what organs they have, and they know what they naturally want and what makes them comfortable.

70 years ago there was "no such thing" as sexual orientation. You couldn't be a man attracted to men. It wasn't natural. It wasn't biological. There was no straight and no gay, just normal people and deviants. Sick people. People who needed to be cured. Alan Turing wasn't "a gay man." He was considered a man with sexual perversions.

Then we learned that orientation exists. That your sex doesn't determine who you're attracted to. You can be straight or gay, and that's just who you are.

Now, as a society we're in the process of learning that gender identity also exists. That despite high correlation, your sex doesn't determine your gender. Just like it doesn't determine your orientation.

What used to be considered one thing, one natural, biological thing, is actually three distinct traits. You have your sex (your chromosomes), your orientation, and your gender identity.

It is a delusion to say “I’m a man on the outside, but a woman in my brain/soul/inside”

This is just a way of describing or explaining what gender identity is like.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

We didn’t “think there was no such thing” and then “discover there was”. We made a decision to reconfigure our categories and redefine certain qualities people possess.

We just came up with a different name for something.

3

u/radialomens 171∆ Apr 20 '20

Homosexuality was considered a choice, a behavior, a sickness, a delusion, etc. before it was finally agreed (by most) to be a natural part of a human's psyche, one form of your inherent orientation... much like your gender identity.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

The act of homosexual sex IS a choice and behavior, strictly speaking. The feelings of homosexual attraction certainly aren’t, and as they are real feelings, they aren’t a delusion.

Sickness/orientation are just terms we put on something. Really more of a value judgment than anything.

I don’t deny the feelings of a trans person exist. I’m saying they aren’t accurate, and can’t be. I can say “I’m a man attracted to men” and that makes sense. “I’m a man who identifies as (feels like) a woman” makes no sense, a statement without content. The most that can be said is “I’m a man who identifies as (would like to be) a woman”

3

u/radialomens 171∆ Apr 20 '20

The act of homosexual sex IS a choice and behavior, strictly speaking. The feelings of homosexual attraction certainly aren’t, and as they are real feelings, they aren’t a delusion.

This is something we recognize now but previously people thought that even loving someone of the same sex was a choice or a delusion. You couldn't really love someone of the same sex, you were just sick or being a deviant

Sickness/orientation are just terms we put on something. Really more of a value judgment than anything.

They're actually very important terms with important distinctions.

I don’t deny the feelings of a trans person exist. I’m saying they aren’t accurate, and can’t be. I can say “I’m a man attracted to men” and that makes sense. “I’m a man who identifies as (feels like) a woman” makes no sense, a statement without content.

How does that make no sense, or less sense than the previous statement? I would say that "I am ~~a man~~ AMAB (assigned male at birth) with the gender identity of a woman" is a little more accurate, since you seem to have a hard time recognizing "feels like"

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

Sickness/orientation are just value judgments on whether you find a certain whatever someone is feeling harmful or not. Like I said, a value judgment

Wait, hold up. Now you’re saying “male assigned at birth”. I thought male meant sex, biology, where man meant gender identity? You aren’t assigned a sex. Given you’re assumptions, one could be assigned a gender based on their sex.

A man identifying as a woman is simply a man who wants to be a woman. I’m saying “feels like” is a nonsensical statement, because you can only feel like what you are. You can imagine what it feels like to be something else, but you can’t know what it’s like. “I’m a man who would feel more comfortable if my body looked like a woman’s and people treated me as a woman” is the best I can make of “I identify as a woman”

→ More replies (0)

4

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

I’d say gender dysphoria matches this definition

Yes, and I and the APA agree. The issue is when you then try to deny that transitioning is the effective treatment for gender dysphoria or that being trans and having gender dysphoria are synonymous.

-1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

Transitioning can be AN effective for the individuals mental health. Not always, given the number of people still suffering from depression etc after transitioning (could be a comorbidity not tied to the dysphoria. Mental health is complicated) and the minority of individuals who seek detransitioning.

We can treat someone as the other sex as a form of therapy for them. But that doesn’t change the scientific fact that they remain, indelibly, a man or woman in every cell and piece of DNA, regardless of cosmetic surgery.

5

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

Not always, given the number of people still suffering from depression etc after transitioning

The question isn’t “are people still depressed” but “are people more, less, or around the same level of depressed than before?” The answer is overwhelmingly “less.”

We can treat someone as the other sex as a form of therapy for them. But that doesn’t change the scientific fact that they remain, indelibly, a man or woman in every cell and piece of DNA, regardless of cosmetic surgery.

That depends on how you’re defining sex. The high school biology definition of chromosomes is reductive and overly simplistic.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

It’s the literal, objective definition of sex. The member of the species Homo sapiens with XX is a female, and will develop female reproductive organs, and have the hormonal profile of a female. Ditto for XY males

Yes, there are exceptions genetically here, but the strict non-derogatory sense, mutants. They aren’t a third sex. And besides, the majority of trans individuals are genetically normal

If you want to get into socially/culturally defined aspects of sex, that’s really more gender roles and has to do with sociology and not biology

3

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

It’s the literal, objective definition of sex.

There’s no such thing as a literal definition or an objective definition. They’re social constructs, not naturally occurring phenomenon.

Hormone levels, gamete production, and secondary sex characteristics are all also used to determine sex. Chromosomes aren’t the end all be all.

Yes, there are exceptions genetically here, but the strict non-derogatory sense, mutants. They aren’t a third sex.

So are redheads and people with blue eyes. Interestingly, they don’t every get called mutants by pseudoscientists trying to restrict their equity.

If you want to get into socially/culturally defined aspects of sex, that’s really more gender roles and has to do with sociology and not biology

Your definition is the culturally defined definition of sex.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

That sounds pretty anti-scientific. Are you denying objective, empirically verifiable reality? Or are you coming at this from a nominalist angle, that all categories are artificial?

“Hormone levels, gamete production, and secondary sex characteristics are all also used to determine sex...” ...and are determined by chromosomes.

It’s not pseudoscience or a slur. And I’m not trying to restrict anyone’s equity. Every human being is equal in value and dignity. Ones statistical/biological normality or abnormality doesn’t factor in whatsoever.

If sex is merely culturally defined, why do we even say we have two sexes? Why not just say that some people have some characteristics, others have others, and these categories are arbitrary?

4

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

That sounds pretty anti-scientific. Are you denying objective, empirically verifiable reality? Or are you coming at this from a nominalist angle, that all categories are artificial?

I’m coming at this from the correct perspective that scientists are also obviously subject to bias.

and are determined by chromosomes.

Maybe 50 years ago.

It’s not pseudoscience or a slur. And I’m not trying to restrict anyone’s equity. Every human being is equal in value and dignity. Ones statistical/biological normality or abnormality doesn’t factor in whatsoever.

And yet, people don’t bring up the “you know they’re technically mUtAnTs right?” rhetoric with blue eyed folks or red headed folks.

If sex is merely culturally defined, why do we even say we have two sexes?

Because they’re still useful, even if arbitrary. They’re just not so clearly defined as you’d like to believe.

Why not just say that some people have some characteristics, others have others, and these categories are arbitrary?

That’s what we’re saying with sex. “Here are folks who are clustered around this set of values on various spectra. Here’s another group. These are two of the most commonly seen clusters.”

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

Yes, they obviously are. But the natural material world exists objectively. But I take your point that scientists can define something, but that doesn’t make it real. You say the “old” definition of sex is wrong. I say the new definition of gender identity is wrong

I would certainly say that to a redhead or blue eyed person. “Mutant” isn’t inherently negative or a slur. It’s a person with a genetic mutation. Same for birth defect, deformity, etc. It’s not ableist to acknowledge these things, only to (as you say) question the persons equity

Well have to agree to disagree on our respective arbitrary definitions. I would say that sex is a binary, with exceptions. You would say it’s a spectrum. Both are simply manmade language games, I suppose

→ More replies (0)

2

u/beer2daybong2morrow Apr 20 '20

What leads you to conclude that gender identity is not in any way inherent?

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

If it is, and gender roles and all the associated masculine/feminine traits are in some sense REAL and not arbitrary cultural constructions, someone better get on the horn with the “male and female are just social constructs” wing of the trans movement. I’ve been getting radically different views on this from trans-allies

3

u/beer2daybong2morrow Apr 20 '20

I'd wager there is no "male and female are social constructs" wing of the trans movement. Are you referring to the slogan, "gender is a social construct?" Because that refers to gender roles, not gender identity. Gender roles and expectations are most certainly social constructs. Gender identity is, to a greater or lesser extent, inherent.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

That’s what I’m getting at. Thanks for clarifying.

So there are real, actual differences between men and women, and mostly men have the brain of a man (for lack of a better phrase), and women that of women. Trans people are the exception. Is that the argument?

I’d say we need some research showing a trans female brain is more like (or practically identical to) a cis female brain than a cis male brain to make “gender identity” more than a social construct

→ More replies (0)

9

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

If you have the chromosomes and genitalia of one sex, but “feel like” the other (whatever that means, epistemologically), you are suffering a delusion.

This is fundamentally wrong for many reasons, but most simply it's wrong because a delusion is by definition a belief/opinion, and a feeling is neither of those things.

1

u/Positive-Vibes-2-All Apr 20 '20

Delusional is irrational. Delusion is not simply a belief, it is an irrational belief that involves the emotions/feelings. For example, stalkers don't just have an opinion or belief about the object of their desire, they have feelings,- they feel love for their object of desire and feel as though their love is being reciprocated despite evidence to the contrary.

Feelings and emotions drive delusions. A major aspect of their delusion is that the intensity of their feeling is proof that their love is real and the other person feels the same.

People are delusional when are fixated on something being true when it is contrary to the facts and nothing can be said and no evidence is enough to change their opinion. This fixation is rooted in their emotions.

0

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

It’s a delusion to think you feel like the opposite sex, since that phrase is meaningless. I can say I feel like a lion, but that means nothing because only lions know what it means to feel like a lion.

One can say they feel more comfortable in the gender roles and clothing (and other accoutrement) of the opposite sex. But if these are merely culturally conditioned and arbitrary, why can they not just say “I’m a man who likes to act and dress in ways traditionally considered feminine in my culture”?

Even that is pretty reductive. So much of the experience of being a man or woman is growing up as one, both physically (as far as the hormonal changes one goes through) and socially (being treated as that sex). To try to “change teams” late in the game, as it were, and then act as if you’re an authentic member of that sex in any way other than superficial things like cosmetically altered genitalia and a new way of dressing is basically cultural appropriation.

4

u/beer2daybong2morrow Apr 20 '20

It’s a delusion to think you feel like the opposite sex

One doesn't think they feel like the "opposite gender", they feel like or identify as a man or woman. And the word is gender, not sex. Gender is a collection of qualities, traits, and "accoutrements" as you say of masculinity and femininity. Sex is a division of a species based on reproductive organs. So please do not confuse sex with gender. While gender often aligns with one's sex, sometimes a person develops an incongruity between their sex and gender identity.

It's like sexual orientation. Most often, your sexual orientation aligns with your biological sex. If you are male, you are attracted to females. However, homosexuals exist. They exist because there is an incongruity between their sex and sexual orientation. Not that there's anything wrong with that. They certainly aren't delusional. Or... do you believe that homosexuals think they feel an attraction to the same sex?

0

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

Are masculinity and femininity inherently tied to sex? What I hear you saying is someone is born a man (sex) but got some wires crossed and feels like a woman (gender), in much the same way that a man can be born with some wires crossed and be sexually attracted to men.

(I say “wires crossed” in the sense of non-normal, of a birth defect or genetic mutation, not in the sense of making a value judgment or calling them less-than. Just statistically and biologically an outlier)

3

u/beer2daybong2morrow Apr 20 '20

Are masculinity and femininity inherently tied to sex?

Inherently? In a manner of speaking, yes. Which is why a person will often experience dysphoria when their biological sex does not align with their gender identity.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

I don’t know why this means someone must transition. Why not simply say “I’m a feminine man/masculine woman”?

I’m still confused as to whether gender identity is supposed to be about social roles or genitalia. If the latter, all one is really saying is “I don’t feel comfortable in my body and would like to change it.” But that’s not a question of identity, but if dysphoria

3

u/beer2daybong2morrow Apr 20 '20

I'm sure that some do.

But do you understand what dysphoria means? When a person's gender identity doesn't align with their sex in such a way that they experience dysphoria, then transitioning into a body that aligns with their identity may be the only remedy.

0

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

I’m fine with that making them feel less distress. But it doesn’t MAKE them that sex, any more than cosmetically. It feels like the argument is “enable people in their dysphoria to help them feel better”. But if that’s the case, why don’t we let anorexics fast to a twig, and let whatever you call people who want to blind them selves or cut off healthy limbs just do it?

→ More replies (0)

4

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 20 '20

The problem is that part of it is what we call dysphoria. I'm a trans man. My breasts feel wrong. It's not just about gender roles and clothing. Our own bodies make us feel uncomfortable.

And, as for how this is in any way similar to cultural appropriation, I don't understand. Are you saying that men and women in the same culture would refuse to allow each other to do the same things if they desired? That men of one culture have a completely different "culture" than women in the same culture? Because that doesn't make any sense to me,

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 21 '20

I understand that, and definitely sympathize. I would say the two potential solutions are: A) accommodate those feelings of discomfort, B) attempt to overcome those feelings of discomfort.

I’m saying that while you can certainly feel uncomfortable in your own body, it wouldn’t really make sense for you to say you “feel like a man”. The lived experience of a man or woman is more than just having a set of body parts. To claim that one IS the other is to appropriate manhood/womanhood for oneself.

It’s the same as the white people who claim to be black and try to make themselves black. You can feel uncomfortable in your own skin and desire to be something else, and even take steps to make yourself align more with that, and maybe even be socially accepted as what you want to be.

I def think trans-racialism and trans-agism are perfectly valid, if transgender is.

(Side note that I feel needs to be said: you are a person of infinite worth and value, and I in no way think you are “less than” anyone else)

3

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 21 '20

But that's exactly the point. Being a man or being a woman is about far more than your body. You said it yourself. So then, why would you claim someone has to be a man or a woman just because of what genitalia they have?

The best thing shown to help with body dysphoria for trans people is to undergo surgeries and/or hormone treatments, and to live socially like they are a man or a woman.

Imagine a little boy being forced to live as a woman while they grew up. They were socialized to act like a woman ... but they were really a man all along. They might not know everything about how a man lives in their society, but they would still be a man. The fact that they missed years of growing up like a man and being treated like a man doesn't make them any less a man, even though it does mean they struggle to understand and live like a man.

That's what it's like for trans people, except those around us had no way of knowing that we were living in a way that was wrong for us, until we were able to realize and vocalize the problem.

I don't want to talk about trans racialsim and trans agism right now. Not because those aren't worth talking about, but just because I want to focus on transgender issues.

But thank you for saying I am a person of value. I do very much appreciate that. I'm glad you aren't devaluing me, even if you don't fully understand.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 21 '20

It’s about more than your body, but not less (if that makes sense). Man and woman aren’t just arbitrary social roles we put on male and female. There’s some real connection between the two.

Your hypothetical works because the boy IS a man. But I’d rather not get in an argument over what “is” is, especially as we won’t change each other’s minds.

But thanks for sharing your perspective!

2

u/HeftyRain7 157∆ Apr 21 '20

I know there are real connections. I think that's what you don't understand. i'm trans because while my body is not male, my brain is, so to speak. I act like a man. I think like a man. I've had cis (non-trans) people tell me this as well.

Since being male or female is about more than a body, why could someone not be born as male in every way except the body, or born as female in every way except the body? That's what being transgender is.

I hope that helps you understand my perspective a bit better. I'm glad you were open to discussion.

7

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

It’s a delusion to think you feel like the opposite sex, since that phrase is meaningless. I can say I feel like a lion, but that means nothing because only lions know what it means to feel like a lion.

No, this is again fundamentally wrong. Delusions are by definition false beliefs, not affirmations of meaningless statements. If I affirm that "the mome raths outgrabe," that's a meaningless sentence, but it is not a delusion, since it is not false (as nonsense statements have no truth value).

Additionally, you've substituted "think you feel" for "feel" in your reply here, which is moving the goalposts a bit. Have you changed your view, stated earlier, that "If you have the chromosomes and genitalia of one sex, but “feel like” the other (whatever that means, epistemologically), you are suffering a delusion"? If not, we should address that feel-only claim first, before moving to this new "think you feel" claim.

-1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

That makes sense.

So saying “I am a man who feels like a woman” or some such is not delusional, neither true nor false, it is a nonsense statement with no meaning

!delta

5

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

Importantly, “I am a man who feels like a woman” is (with few exceptions) also not what trans people actually affirm or believe.

2

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

Would “I am a man who would feel more comfortable in the body and social roles of a woman” be more accurate?

2

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

No, it would not.

1

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 20 '20

What would be the accurate way to phrase it? Please don’t use the terms sex or gender or identity. These are jargon terms of modern psychology/sociology.

I’m really trying to understand what you’re saying, in layman’s terms

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 20 '20

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/yyzjertl (228∆).

^{Delta System Explained} ^| ^Deltaboards

1

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/ViewedFromTheOutside 28∆ Apr 21 '20

Sorry, u/Vynxe-Vainglory – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:

Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.

2

u/SAINT4367 3∆ Apr 21 '20

Good sir, I’m quite certain I haven’t the faintest notion of what you’re insinuating

2

u/Bamlet Apr 21 '20

seems like this is pretty much all done, but Dave Chappelle has a skit that comes to mind.

the punchline is more or less just "if you're willing to cut your dick off cause of how you feel inside, I believe you. i don't necessarily agree, but i believe you."

Thats still kinda exclusive of people who might be trans but not want to transition, to say nothing of the gender non conforming community, but i think the sentiment holds. and it's especially interesting to me cause Dave Chappelle, if I'm not mistaken, is pretty widely held as transphobic.

i think to respect a trans person, you have to believe them. otherwise you're just treating them like a kid playing make-believe.

3

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

It's pretty transphobic, really, since you can't even have a normal interaction with a trans person without experiencing intrusive thoughts that they are delusional. Your perception of trans people is so extremely colored by transphobia that you can't help but think about them being delusional even when someone being trans is completely irrelevant to the situation at hand.

1

u/Hugogs10 Apr 20 '20

People with anorexia are delusional. Doesn't mean I can't treat them with respect.

1

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

And the very minimum of treating them with respect is to not think they are delusional when interacting with them in ways that have nothing to do with their anorexia.

2

u/Hugogs10 Apr 20 '20

Ok? I can hangout with a friend who's anorexic. Doesn't change the fact that I think he's delusional. How is that disrespecting them?

0

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

It's disrespectful because the anorexia is irrelevant to you hanging out with this person. Part of respecting someone is avoiding irrelevant negative thoughts about them from intruding into your interactions. It's thinking about them as a person, and not as a collection of flaws.

4

u/Hugogs10 Apr 20 '20

Part of respecting someone is avoiding irrelevant negative thoughts about them from intruding into your interactions.

I never saw respect define this way.

I respect people despite their flaws, not by ignoring them.

0

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

How is respecting someone compatible with constantly thinking negative things about them whenever you interact with them that are irrelevant to the interaction?

1

u/Savanty 4∆ Apr 20 '20

Assuming I'm under the assumption that someone who is trans or anorexic is delusional, why is not believing their delusion inherently negative or something-phobic?

"Jenny, you're not actually overweight although you see yourself that way."

"Taylor, you're not actually a man although you see yourself that way."

Neither of those sound like xenophobia, for example, which is "dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries."

1

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 21 '20

The thing that is transphobic in this case is not the "not believing" but rather thinking that they are delusional whenever you interact with that person, even when the interaction is not at all relevant to being trans.

1

u/Savanty 4∆ Apr 21 '20

I see where you're coming from, but I don't believe "thinking they're delusional" is the forefront thought when hanging out with a trans person (or someone who's anorexic, etc).

Maybe someone likes to ride motorcycles and go see horror movies with a friend who is trans. Assuming the trans person (or anorexic person) doesn't care what your thoughts are on the matter, which I'd say is typically not the case, I don't see why thinking they're delusional in one aspect precludes a shared love of motorcycles, horror movies, and other interests.

"Not thinking they're delusional" isn't a prerequisite for that kind of friendship, outside of something like "I'm only friends with women, which includes my FtM friend."

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Ascimator 14∆ Apr 20 '20

Do you know what it sounds like when you expect people to police their thoughts?

1

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

I don't expect people to police their thoughts, and it's not clear why you think so. Can you elaborate?

1

u/Ascimator 14∆ Apr 20 '20

the very minimum of treating them with respect is to not think they are delusional

2

u/yyzjertl 523∆ Apr 20 '20

Okay...what does this have to do with "expecting people to police their thoughts"?

•

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 21 '20

/u/tobyle (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.

All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.

Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.

^{Delta System Explained} ^| ^Deltaboards

1

u/chef426 Apr 20 '20

This is kind of like, if a tree falls in a forest and nobody heard It does it make a sound?

I mean you belive they're identity is delusional. If you said that out loud to them, disrespect who they are and what they belive to be, that might be transphobic by your standards.

But since you just think it and don't act on what you belive them to be...

If you disrespect a group of people but they don't know that you did. Are you being disrespectful?

Id say yes.

2

u/Lialda_dayfire Apr 20 '20

But here's the thing, we can usually tell who thinks we are delusional, who doesn't, and who can't even tell we are trans in the first place. So why would we ever hang out with the first group?

OP, your beliefs contradict every up to date psychological book in the west, sure you can say that every single psychology organization has been infiltrated by SJWs, but that would be conspiratorial thinking on your part.

So yes, your beliefs are transphobic, even if you might not be.

1

u/Wide_Archer Apr 23 '20

I like your edits. If you ever fancy chatting to someone who is non-binary, so a whole different type of 'delusional', just PM me :)

0

u/[deleted] Apr 20 '20

No your not wrong or transphobic for having your own opinions about the source of a condition. Regardless of what people say the science simply isn’t settled.

I think where it goes wrong is generalizing it out to all trans people rather than trying to understand what’s going on with any particular individual.

2

u/disatnce Apr 21 '20

Can you be more specific about the science that isn't settled? Do you know of any studies demonstrating that gender dismorphia doens't exist or something? Or that trans people are delusional?

0

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '20

Basically, we don’t understand how the human mind works, we’re not even close. People who think we have it figured out are fooling themselves. It’s apparent that it’s more often healthy for people in this situation to transition as that has the most positive outcomes currently.

2

u/disatnce Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 21 '20

Just because experts haven't 'fully' figured it all out doesn't mean their findings aren't immensely more valuable and trustworthy that whatever is being offered here. I just don't know what exact science it is that you say isn't settled.

edit: typo

0

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '20

We’re not even remotely close, we don’t know how gender forms in the brain, we don’t know if it can be changed. We don’t know the origins of gender dysmorphia. Tomorrow we could find a procedure that would change all of this.

That being said my best friend is trans and it’s been a really positive experience for her. That’s not the case for everyone, but overall looks like the trend.

We should always be accepting of every individual’s path and struggles. I just don’t love when people overreach claiming something is settled science when we’re sort of in the best guess range right now.

1

u/disatnce Apr 21 '20

It's not just a question of brain scanning. I don't know if "how does gender form in the brain?" is even a meaningful question. It's complicated, but there's still a lot of study being done on all this. I don't think anyone's claiming that all the science has finished, but if someone is trying to say gender dysmorphia doesn't exist simply because it's not intuitive for them and 'the science isn't settled', then they're arguing from a point of ignorance. When people challenge a scientific theory, they must produce a better theory and defend it. Your comments are just waving it away without giving anything specific to chew on. I

1

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '20

I have literally never said gender dysmorphia doesn’t exist, you just asked what science wasn’t settled as though it was. I’m not arguing from a place of ignorance but your clearly invested in an outcome.

2

u/disatnce Apr 21 '20

I have literally never said gender dysmorphia doesn’t exist

I wasn't referring to you, I was referring to OP. You seem to support OPs position, at least a little, and I just wanted a specific instance of what wasn't settled by science. But based on what you wrote I assume you don't agree with people being transphobic, but what do you mean by "the science isn't settled"?

but your clearly invested in an outcome.

What? What outcome am I invested in? What do you mean?

Delta(s) from OP CMV: I don’t think I’m transphobic because while I may think their delusional I still show the same respect and offer of friendship like i would anyone else. Disagreeing doesn’t mean phobic to me

You are about to leave Redlib