Something new about the Trans rights movement

I've been thinking lately about how civil rights have progressed throughout the past century, from black and minority basic rights, to inter racial marriage becoming accepted, to women's liberation, to gay rights movement, and now to trans rights movement.

In the case of minorities and women, there was no argument over that these people are different in race/gender. The fight was about them deserving equal rights. In the case of homosexuals, it was similar, but based not on a visible physical trait but on a person's preference. But still, very few people would deny that a homosexual person is homosexual.

With trans we've crossed that new line. Trans people say that they are the opposite gender of what society saw them as before. The trans rights movement is demanding not only fair and equal treatment for people who are trans (as these other civil rights movements have before them for their respective groups), but that people are trans in the first place, which is something many don't accept. So that's a barrier these other movements didn't have to contend with and a social control over the populace other civil rights movements didn't need.

When a person was born a girl and now has decided he is a boy, and he demands I call him "he" instead of "she", they are making a demand on me quite different than the black man who wants me to view him as my equal (which I don't think twice about doing) instead of in a racist manner.

I don't think society has examined this difference very much. Does it matter? Should I be compelled to call a person who was born with a penis a "woman" under the same moral reasoning that I should be compelled to accept a black man as my equal? Or is there more justification for the latter than for the former? Is there more moral justification for me to accept two gay men as "married" than there is for me to accept that a person born with a penis is a now a "woman"?

 

There are differences, I agree, but they aren't straightforward. These are questions I wrestle with.

What about if someone doesn't want to call someone black a "person"?

What about if someone wants to call you a woman and refer to you as "she"? Is it ok to insist that they don't do that?

Is that different from, say, not considering people to be "married" if they weren't married in a Christian ceremony, so that Jews, for instance, aren't "married"?

I'm not saying that I have clear answers to any of these questions. I'm saying it's complicated.

 

That is not true. There are lots of people who continue to assert that homosexuality isn't a fundamental characteristic of a person but only activities they choose to do.

You only see it as different because you don't think twice about racial equality. Many people in the past (and a not insignificantly number today) wouldn't consider those two prospects so different and some might even find the racial issue the more difficult one.

In simple practical terms though, I don't see why just the name and labels you're asked to use when interacting with someone needs be anything that is especially difficult. Do you object to people who prefer to go by John rather than Johnathon or go by their middle-name or a nickname rather than their real first name? Is calling Saul Hudson "Slash" any different to calling Michael Smith "Michelle"?

There are various practical and social issues around transgender people but I frankly think names and labels are the least of them. They are often used as symbols for the real difficulties because a lot of people struggle to understand, explain or justify them (even to themselves). Which kind of loops back around to your question.

 

Also, if a person born with a penis demands I call them she rather than he, and change or pretend to change my perception of their gender, is that so unlike a Christian person saying they have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and demanding I believe or pretend to believe God and Jesus are real?

 

I would liken that to somebody not wanting to call a trans person a person. I would liken what trans people are demanding more with if a black person demanded I call him white. Trans-race is an interesting side topic but not quite on point here.

I don't think that would trouble me too much, especially if if they were doing so because they honestly believed it. Certainly not as bad as them telling me I'm to burn in hell because I'm a non-believer in their religion.

I don't have any problem with people not viewing my marriage as a "real" marriage, so long as the state recognizes it so I get all the same rights and freedoms as other married couples.

It is definitely complicated. Moreso than with the previous civil rights movements.

 

They still say they choose to do such activities though, so they must recognize the homosexual has some interest in doing it. The fight for gay rights was to get people to recognize them as equal human beings. The trans rights movement is about more than that; they want to not only be recognized as equal human beings, but also as a particular gender that the people they are demanding this from don't believe they are.

Names and labels are the start of it. But they are a basic demand that we follow along with a reality as the person demanding their pronouns is directing instead of the reality that we may ourselves hold. It is a small request for sure, but it opens the door to more.

I would liken it to religious people wanting to say grace before a meal. As an atheist, I'll bow my head and keep silent, as a courtesy. I may even say "God bless you" when they sneeze, etc. As a child I stood as the "Lord's Prayer" was recited in school, even though I thought it was fake. These are small acts of contrition on my part, similar to my saying he for a person I think is actually male if they want me to, as a way of being polite.

But then we have the next step, where these people want to be fully recognized as the opposite gender, compete in opposite gender sports (genetic males fighting genetic females in fighting sports and beating the crap out of them, etc), entering opposite sex bathrooms (not that I much care; I think bathrooms should be unisex), etc.

 

The only question is, "Whose perceptions do we believe, ours or someone else's?"

 

My question is why it is such a big deal for someone to call another as they prefer (identify as) to be addressed. In most cases - whether they have had transition surgery or not - they are dressed in the manner which they identify. They have a major mountain to climb ahead if people refuse to simply address them as they identify. Whether a person understands the mind of a trans person or agrees with it, is it such an enormous request that when speaking to them they be addressed appropriated (to them)?

 

It shouldn't be a big deal. It's really about basic human respect.

 

Yes. And should we be forced to state somebody else's perception of reality is correct and ours is not, as a courtesy? I mean, I'll do it, but am I then expected to mean it and to believe it and to actually view and treat them as if they are the opposite gender when it comes to matters that society has separated the genders on?

It isn't. Just like giving up a minute or so before a meal so the religious can say a prayer to an imaginary being (as I see it) isn't a big deal. But it doesn't end there.

 

There is also a difference between voluntarily saying one you think is a he is a "she", as a courtesy, and being compelled to do so by law. I find that difference important.

 

A person should not be able to declare themselves a member of the opposite sex from which they were born and have that become official on their declaration alone. In my opinion, that should only carry legal weight when that person has undergone transitional surgery and other treatments. While they will still retain some semblance of their gender at birth, it is at least a more concrete position than just making a declaration that everyone else is expected to abide by.

But despite that, I see very few situations where it actually even matters. Right now trans folks trying to play sports as a member of their desired gender instead of their gender at birth seems to be one of the only areas where it does matter. And in that respect, I have to agree with those who do not think it should be allowed. The segregation by gender in sports is not based on feelings and identities, it is based on physical traits. Men, because of testosterone, have an advantage in physical aspects. That in no way means that women are weak or inferior, or that a woman can't be better at physical activities than a man. It just means that in general, male physiology has inherent advantages that female physiology does not.

If there is a transgender male who wants to play with the girls, why don't they simply play on the male team as a girl. In my area, girls are allowed to play football on the male team. I see no reason why this cannot happen across the board.

 

Yes. Trans in regard to gendered sports is one, and probably the most obvious case in point. But anywhere there is gender segregation this would become a question, ranging from gendered bathrooms to a gendered draft for the military. If there is a military draft and only men are subject to it, should trans women (not fake trans women like on MASH) be subject to it as well? Should trans men be subject to it while others born as women aren't?

 

Why is their gender your reality? It is such a small ask to address someone in the way they choose. If you have a lifelong friend who's name is John and he asks you to refer to him - in future - as Mark, would you see it as a huge imposition? Sure, you'll get it wrong from time to time, but you'd try - wouldn't you?

 

Basic human DIGNITY is one of the UNENUMERATED RIGHTS and should be RESPECTED in accordance with the individual concerned.

A male-to-female trans person has a bigger hurdle than a female-to-male trans person when it comes to APPEARANCE.

However if the individual is presenting themselves as the Gender that they IDENTIFY themselves as being then common courtesy and RESPECT for them would be to use the pronouns that APPLY in those circumstances.

Yes, this is a TRANSITION not only for those Trans individuals but also for SOCIETY in general.

We the People ADAPTED to UPHOLDING the RIGHTS of Gays to MARRY the consenting adult of their choice and NOW it is a non-issue for the majority of society.

We the People just need to ADAPT to upholding the RIGHTS of Trans people to their DIGNITY and give them the SAME RESPECT that we give to EVERYONE else.

This is NOT an IMPOSITION on We the People.

This is what it MEANS when we PLEDGE out ALLEGIANCE to the Constitution to UPHOLD the rights of our fellow Americans irrespective of our individual opinions.

Capiche?

 

Because they exist in reality. The same would be so if a black person demanded you see them as white, or if someone demanded you believe in a God that you don't, or if somebody demanded you see a horse as a cow. You can pretend, but can you actually make yourself believe what you don't? You are being asked to lie. That is noteworthy.

As I have written many times now above, no it is not much to ask and I am happy doing it.

That is just a name change, not an indication of gender change. You could also be askes to call a man "Sally" but still regard him as a man. Him then asking you to regard him, or even actually view him, as a woman is a whole other thing.

Yes I would.

 

Sure. But is this about basic human dignity? We aren't talking about people calling them subhuman.

That would be polite, yes. But should it be legally required, and if so, how far should we be required to take it? Whenever gender separation comes up (military draft, gendered sports, gendered bathrooms, etc), this will be an issue.

That was about recognizing them as equals and making sure they have the same rights as everyone else. That was about fighting bigotry. Same as tbe civil rights movements for black people and for women. This one is a bit different. And if you are aboit to ask how, I refer you to the OP.

Yes it is. It definitely is. It is asking people to lie or try to change reality by sheer force of belief, for the sake of being polite. That is an imposition. Doesnt mean we shouldn't do it.

Many of us here are not from your country.

I understand. I dont think you actually read and considered what I wrote in the OP though.

 

Here's a key thing. When a person tells you they are a woman, how do you know, short of them telling you, that they have or had a penis? Are you looking? Are you checking DNA or chromosomes? If not, then why would you not assume that what they are saying is accurate?

 

This is actually a false comparison. You are comparing a person telling you something internal to them with a person telling you something external to them. Closer in comparison would be to look at two Christians, where one is telling the other they are not Christian because they don't believe as the first one does.

 

My take on the trans issue is, there are people born with both sets of sex traits. IE Penis and Boobs. They are called hermaphrodites.

If humanity can get bodily organs mixed up, then I see no reason for one's hormone and brain activity to also get messed up signals and have a person be a different gender than the physical body says it should be.

Humans and all higher living organisms, like animals and mammals do not have a clear distinct cutoff from what is considered all mall or all female.
The makeup of these lifeforms is very complex and not understood at this time.

I will let the person, family, friends, doctors, psychiatrists make those determinations. For I have no real experience in that area.

 

At the end of the day, that is what is should always be about. Basic human respect.
The world is full of complex things we do not understand completely.

 

...
For years, Olympic champion Caster Semenya has been fighting for the right to compete. The South African sprinter, who's won back-to-back golds in the 800m, is hyperandrogenous, meaning that she was born with elevated levels of testosterone. World Athletics (IAAF), the international governing body of track and field, decided that gave her an unfair advantage over other women. The organization created a new rule stipulating that Semenya and other female athletes like her with naturally high levels of testosterone, would be forced to take medication in order to alter their hormones.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mo...hormones-i-will-continue-to-fight/ar-BB18SnPr

Even being completely female, whatever that actually means, isn't always good enough.
The female above has to take testosterone reducing drugs in order to compete as the female she actually is. What ever female actually is.

It is not a cut and dried area when it comes to the actual definitions of female and male.
Humans are a complex organism.

 

This is partly true. Transgender people are being denied jobs and facing other discrimination because they are trans. Being told that they can't wear certain clothing and such. That is outside of what they are called. There would more standing on the label/pronoun issue for non transgenders, if there was not the other discrimination going on.

 

Rephrase the question. "Whose perceptions do I believe about myself; mine or someone else's?"