I personally believe the trans woman that want to claim the term woman are looking for validation of their identity. They are not trying to "appropriate womanhood".
This statement you make is a bit insensitive. Have you had to question your identity? I clearly had to question my identity. I lived a str8 married life for 32 years. When I a…
I personally believe the trans woman that want to claim the term woman are looking for validation of their identity. They are not trying to "appropriate womanhood".
This statement you make is a bit insensitive. Have you had to question your identity? I clearly had to question my identity. I lived a str8 married life for 32 years. When I actively came out as gay I knew I would lose support of most of the "friends" I had. I had the advantage of getting validation from the gay community.
As it turns out, much of the validation I got from the gay community was very self serving on the part of those who were validating me. They were really looking to hold me up as a reason why the str8 community is oppressive. For a while, that helped me justify moving to actively become gay. It wasn't long before I totally rejected that position. I no longer need validation from either the gay or str8 community. In fact, I struggle to identify with much of the gay community because they are still looking for validation from others.
The Masterpiece Baker and Christian wedding site lawsuits are examples of the gay community dysfunctionally trying to force the religious and str8 community to validate them. Its ridiculous.
That said, gender dysphoria is a very real issue for many trans people. I get that they would like have validation from the larger community of woman. They need to realize that they don't need validation from anyone. They do need legal support for basic issues like where to pee.
"As it turns out, much of the validation I got from the gay community was very self serving on the part of those who were validating me"
Of course. I think this is almost always the case. Because people who truly care about you accept you. They don't "validate" you. Finding validation is our job, not the responsibility of everyone who won't use our pronouns. As you say, you no longer need validation because, I presume, you're more happy in who you are.
As for trans women, their identity is trans woman, no? That is acceptance. As womanhood is already a thing, and as womanhood categorically does not include male human beings, yes, the claim "trans women are women" is an attempt to appropriate womanhood. To change it from what is, to something more convenient to people who want it.
Yes, gender dysphoria is a real issue. I understand that. But gender dysphoria doesn't change your biology. Regardless of women's spaces, regardless of hormones and surgeries, regardless of any of the other stupidity that has sprung up in this culture war, trans women are trans women. To deny this is a fundamental failure of acceptance.
Not really. I question my beliefs, I question my assumptions, I reflect on my values, I observe as my sexual orientation evolves, and so on. None of those are to me "my identity".
But I can just look at my ID (identification) to check my identity if I forget, that which makes me unique.
The idea of redefining "identity" to mean "which groups am I voluntarily, or involuntarily, associated with, whether I personally am typical or atypical of that group" is an odd inversion of the concept of identity. I am quite atypical of some groups of which I am nominally a member - that group membership would mislead you about who I am, rather than enlighten you. And even if I am not atypical, I share only some facet or trait with others in that group - my identity is unique, not defined by a single trait.
All that said about the word "identity", I do hear that you went through a period where you were forced to examine which group(s) you belonged to, and that this group membership question *in your mind* comprises your "identity". I'm not in charge of language, so you can do you.
Identities as I use it and as I believe it’s really used is how well a person internal views aligns with the dominant cultural norms.
I’m a cis-man - ie I’m genetically male and identify as male. That is dominant cultural norm.
I’m man that was married and had kids and now grandkids - that is the dominant cultural norm for a man.
I have never been incarcerated - that is a dominant cultural norm for being trustworthy.
I supported myself and my family my whole life. Another positive cultural norm.
I identified as “Christian” for most of my life. Definitely aligned with the cultural norm of the United States.
I’m a man sexually attracted to other men. Becoming OK but still not anywhere aligned with the cultural norm.
I got divorced. Now somewhat neutral of a cultural norm.
I’m living as a gay man now. OK but not the cultural norm. Most still feel uncomfortable knowing this.
I don’t support many of the ideas in the gay community. Not the norm in my community. We are supposed to stick together and be on board with the vocal part of the community.
Those are all major identity characteristics. Have you ever had to come to grips with an identity you felt you were that didn’t align with the dominant cultural norm!
Interesting how the only trait you specifically described as an identity was "Christian."
All the rest; man, married, father, grandfather, non-inmate, gay, divorced, these are all facts about you. Things as you say, that you ARE. Things that you can't change. You can be any of these things (except Christian) and still think, dress, and behave however you want.
Similarly then, woman is not an identity. You cannot become one, any more than you can become straight or Asian. If, one day, you decide you'd like to wear feminine clothing or inject yourself with female hormones, I think you should be free to do that. But that still wouldn't make you a woman.
“Im not sure why you moved to using the term “fact”. No trans person would deny the fact of their genetics”
You sweet summer child 😅 Yes, actually I’ve had several conversations (and seen countless more) with people who deny the most fundamental aspects of their biology. But yes, you’re right about my use of the word “facts”. Much better would have been “immutable characteristics that cannot change.”
For the overwhelming majority of people, “man” and “woman” are immutable characteristics, equivalent to being a male or female human. Just as a vixen is equivalent to being a female fox and rooster is equivalent to being a male chicken.
And just to circle back to your earlier claim. Even if I accepted that being a woman was nothing to do with your biology but whether you present as “sugar and spice” (do you not see that the nursery rhyme is the position the “woman is a feeling” side is taking?) there’s now increasing debate about whether trans women are female. Even though the only prerequisite for being a trans woman is that you are NOT female.
We are passionately agreeing on everything. I doubt you disagree that there are characteristics that culture has of a woman and man that have nothing to do with genetics.
The nursery rhyme is just an old example.
In fact, different cultures different in many of the characteristics of woman and man. Regardless, they don't believe a man can become a woman - a.l.a. Matt Walsh What is a woman. A very large majority of world doesn't believe that a man can become a woman or vice-versa. That will never change.
I personally believe the trans woman that want to claim the term woman are looking for validation of their identity. They are not trying to "appropriate womanhood".
This statement you make is a bit insensitive. Have you had to question your identity? I clearly had to question my identity. I lived a str8 married life for 32 years. When I actively came out as gay I knew I would lose support of most of the "friends" I had. I had the advantage of getting validation from the gay community.
As it turns out, much of the validation I got from the gay community was very self serving on the part of those who were validating me. They were really looking to hold me up as a reason why the str8 community is oppressive. For a while, that helped me justify moving to actively become gay. It wasn't long before I totally rejected that position. I no longer need validation from either the gay or str8 community. In fact, I struggle to identify with much of the gay community because they are still looking for validation from others.
The Masterpiece Baker and Christian wedding site lawsuits are examples of the gay community dysfunctionally trying to force the religious and str8 community to validate them. Its ridiculous.
That said, gender dysphoria is a very real issue for many trans people. I get that they would like have validation from the larger community of woman. They need to realize that they don't need validation from anyone. They do need legal support for basic issues like where to pee.
"As it turns out, much of the validation I got from the gay community was very self serving on the part of those who were validating me"
Of course. I think this is almost always the case. Because people who truly care about you accept you. They don't "validate" you. Finding validation is our job, not the responsibility of everyone who won't use our pronouns. As you say, you no longer need validation because, I presume, you're more happy in who you are.
As for trans women, their identity is trans woman, no? That is acceptance. As womanhood is already a thing, and as womanhood categorically does not include male human beings, yes, the claim "trans women are women" is an attempt to appropriate womanhood. To change it from what is, to something more convenient to people who want it.
Yes, gender dysphoria is a real issue. I understand that. But gender dysphoria doesn't change your biology. Regardless of women's spaces, regardless of hormones and surgeries, regardless of any of the other stupidity that has sprung up in this culture war, trans women are trans women. To deny this is a fundamental failure of acceptance.
> "Have you had to question your identity?"
Not really. I question my beliefs, I question my assumptions, I reflect on my values, I observe as my sexual orientation evolves, and so on. None of those are to me "my identity".
But I can just look at my ID (identification) to check my identity if I forget, that which makes me unique.
The idea of redefining "identity" to mean "which groups am I voluntarily, or involuntarily, associated with, whether I personally am typical or atypical of that group" is an odd inversion of the concept of identity. I am quite atypical of some groups of which I am nominally a member - that group membership would mislead you about who I am, rather than enlighten you. And even if I am not atypical, I share only some facet or trait with others in that group - my identity is unique, not defined by a single trait.
All that said about the word "identity", I do hear that you went through a period where you were forced to examine which group(s) you belonged to, and that this group membership question *in your mind* comprises your "identity". I'm not in charge of language, so you can do you.
Identities as I use it and as I believe it’s really used is how well a person internal views aligns with the dominant cultural norms.
I’m a cis-man - ie I’m genetically male and identify as male. That is dominant cultural norm.
I’m man that was married and had kids and now grandkids - that is the dominant cultural norm for a man.
I have never been incarcerated - that is a dominant cultural norm for being trustworthy.
I supported myself and my family my whole life. Another positive cultural norm.
I identified as “Christian” for most of my life. Definitely aligned with the cultural norm of the United States.
I’m a man sexually attracted to other men. Becoming OK but still not anywhere aligned with the cultural norm.
I got divorced. Now somewhat neutral of a cultural norm.
I’m living as a gay man now. OK but not the cultural norm. Most still feel uncomfortable knowing this.
I don’t support many of the ideas in the gay community. Not the norm in my community. We are supposed to stick together and be on board with the vocal part of the community.
Those are all major identity characteristics. Have you ever had to come to grips with an identity you felt you were that didn’t align with the dominant cultural norm!
"Those are all major identity characteristics."
I disagree here.
Interesting how the only trait you specifically described as an identity was "Christian."
All the rest; man, married, father, grandfather, non-inmate, gay, divorced, these are all facts about you. Things as you say, that you ARE. Things that you can't change. You can be any of these things (except Christian) and still think, dress, and behave however you want.
Similarly then, woman is not an identity. You cannot become one, any more than you can become straight or Asian. If, one day, you decide you'd like to wear feminine clothing or inject yourself with female hormones, I think you should be free to do that. But that still wouldn't make you a woman.
I went to a conservative Lutheran Christian grade school in a conservative Christian community.
My “Christian” identity is a fact not a choice. It is the dominant identity I had to work to understand.
Yes identities can include choices - especially choices after puberty.
Im not sure why you moved to using the term “fact”. No trans person would deny the fact of their genetics. That’s not being argued.
What is being argued is how much genetics determine whether a person is a man or woman or other for that matter.
How the dominant culture perceives and man and woman in many cases has nothing to do with their genetics.
This classic nursery rhyme proves that in spades.
What are little boys made of?
What are little boys made of?
Snips, snails
And puppy-dogs' tails
That's what little boys are made of
What are little girls made of?
What are little girls made of?
Sugar and spice
And all things nice
That's what little girls are made of.
“Im not sure why you moved to using the term “fact”. No trans person would deny the fact of their genetics”
You sweet summer child 😅 Yes, actually I’ve had several conversations (and seen countless more) with people who deny the most fundamental aspects of their biology. But yes, you’re right about my use of the word “facts”. Much better would have been “immutable characteristics that cannot change.”
For the overwhelming majority of people, “man” and “woman” are immutable characteristics, equivalent to being a male or female human. Just as a vixen is equivalent to being a female fox and rooster is equivalent to being a male chicken.
And just to circle back to your earlier claim. Even if I accepted that being a woman was nothing to do with your biology but whether you present as “sugar and spice” (do you not see that the nursery rhyme is the position the “woman is a feeling” side is taking?) there’s now increasing debate about whether trans women are female. Even though the only prerequisite for being a trans woman is that you are NOT female.
We are passionately agreeing on everything. I doubt you disagree that there are characteristics that culture has of a woman and man that have nothing to do with genetics.
The nursery rhyme is just an old example.
In fact, different cultures different in many of the characteristics of woman and man. Regardless, they don't believe a man can become a woman - a.l.a. Matt Walsh What is a woman. A very large majority of world doesn't believe that a man can become a woman or vice-versa. That will never change.
A very large majority of the world is right.