simon666 - 2019-02-08
Here, I'll kick off the shit show.
1. There is a pragmatic argument that it makes sense to simply call and address people in the ways that they determine for themselves. If my friend Eric wanted to be called Mike or Bill, I'd do it because Eric gets to make that decision. Likewise, if Eric wanted to be called Jill, Monique, Oogala, or Rabnobo with certain pronouns I'd do it. People go by the names in which they want to be addressed. We're keeping the same custom, just expanding the set of names and bodies that the norm/custom entail.
2. Arguments from those who are not sympathetic, shall we say, to transgender people, sometimes argue that they, the unsympathetic, don't need to respect or change their language use for someone else, even if that someone else wants to be called or addressed differently. That's true, but it entails calling and identifying the unsympathetic person by any name and gender and pronoun that one wants irrespective of their own preference. So if hetero Mike man with a dick doesn't like calling trans fem Kelly a she, then Mike can be called Linda and get she. As Kant would say, it fails the CI test!
3. The norm in 1 can operate successfully without the need of any metaphysical talk about what counts as what and why. What makes a man, what makes a woman? Shrug. We're just uttering sounds at each other for identification (referring) purposes and the custom is to utter the sounds one wants for one self. Those with the problem with trans people try to put 3 before 1, but it's like this: the metaphysical question is only important in limited contexts, say, medical. And the kind of body one has and how one adorns it is also only important in limited contexts, say, when physical intimacy is involved. Otherwise, who cares who writes your pay check, makes your coffee, arrests the criminal, or puts out the fire so long as those activities are done to standard?
|
gmol - 2019-02-08 Outside of this imaginary world you live in the rest of us have a fairly easy time classifying humans that are male and female. Look outside the window and you will see that women and men are treated very differently in the world in rather important ways.
Do you know what femicide is? Do you know about sex imbalances in places like India and China? Do you know about the sex imbalance in violent crime? Do you the what proportion of rape victims are female? Do you know which humans get pregnant? Do you understand the difficulties women encounter as a result of menstruation throughout the world? Are you aware of sex based differences in daily matter like calorie/alcohol intake, serious diseases, outcomes and treatment?
Think carefully before you make foolish suggestions that the body you have doesn't matter.
|
simon666 - 2019-02-09 gmol, what are you even talking about? You're certainly not talking about any point that I made. Maybe you're just making a thematically relevant point, but one not related to anything I said?
|
simon666 - 2019-02-09 BTW: I enumerated my points not just for funsies, but so you or anyone else would refer to and directly address anything I actually said, should you feel compelled.
|
gmol - 2019-02-10 My post is a direct response to this sentence:
"And the kind of body one has and how one adorns it is also only important in limited contexts, say, when physical intimacy is involved."
Human lives are very different depending on if one has a male or female body.
|
gmol - 2019-02-09
My post is a direct response to this sentence:
"And the kind of body one has and how one adorns it is also only important in limited contexts, say, when physical intimacy is involved."
Human lives are very different depending on if one has a male or female body.
|
simon666 - 2019-02-11 Hmm. That's strange. I really was not expecting you or anyone else to read that sentence in that way. The context of my three points was to push the position that it is sensible to call and address people in whatever way they want.
I take it as blindingly fucking obvious that people *do* treat other people differently based on perceived features of their bodies. In fact, trans men and women have some insight into how they were treated differently after transitioning and passing.
I was not advocating that *women* aren't treated differently. Certainly they are! My point in 3 is that the social significance of having a particular kind of body is salient (matters) in narrow but plural contexts, such as medical contexts. How one's body is constructed (by way of genetic cause) is important for certain treatments of medicine and health and so on. I thought this was clear in what I was wrote above, you seemed to read what I wrote as saying the opposite.
Most contexts, say, that of being a banker, being a barista, a meter maid, a dog walker, you name it, do not require typically focusing on what's going on with one's body so long as one's body can perform the actions requisite of the given task in the context.
|
gmol - 2019-02-11 You still can't seem to see past your own verbosity. Look at what you've written:
"...the social significance of having a particular kind of body is salient (matters) in narrow but plural contexts..."
It is life and death for very large fractions of the population, look up what the term "female infanticide" means. Why do you think people commit such heinous acts?
|
| Register or login To Post a Comment |
Reddit
Digg
Stumble
Facebook