• kipo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    28 days ago

    Jessie McGrath, 63, a lifelong Republican who is trans, grew up around guns on farms in Colorado and Nebraska. She decided to vote for Harris when Republicans started attacking gender-affirming care and “wanting to basically outlaw my ability to exist”. She ended up being a delegate at the Democratic national convention.

    “Government getting involved in making healthcare decisions is something that I never thought I would see the Republican party doing,” she said.

    What the actual…how are people this ignorant.

    • Trae@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      28 days ago

      She was 100% on board with them regulating reproductive care because it has never personally affected her as a biological male.

      She only has an issue now that her favorite team turned on her after telling her for the last 30 years that she’s next.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        27 days ago

        Assigned male at birth is the term you want to use. “Biological male” is a term used by transphobes to spread misinformation.

        Biology is very complex and not your elementary school version of biology. What makes someone “biologically” male? Is it having a penis, having testis, having more testosterone than estrogen, having XY chromosomes? These can all be intermixed with other characteristics.

        The “basic biology” definition doesn’t work in the real world, and the people using it are actively trying to harm trans people or ignorant. Now you’re more informed so ignorance isn’t an excuse anymore.

        • hector@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          26 days ago

          I’m not super versed into this, just looking to learn 🤗

          Individuals having two X chromosomes (XX) are female; individuals having one X chromosome and one Y chromosome (XY) are male.

          Doesn’t that and having a penis means being a biological man? I don’t really see how “biological man” is offensive…

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            26 days ago

            The problem is what does it mean to be biologically a man? Is it a static thing defined at birth or is it a description of the living organism as it exists? (It’s the latter.) For example, there are some animals that can change their sex naturally. We don’t say they’re just the one they’re born as.

            OK, so now humans. If biological sex is a description of the person as they exist currently, what does it mean for us? Chromosomes are a useful tool because they contain the code that tells our body how to develop, but the actual development is the part that matters, not the chromosomes. The chromosomes will dictate what hormones are produced, and the hormones are what actually control development. We can control what hormones are in the body, so we can hijack the process and change the actual development.

            So, since biological sex is a description of the creature as they are, if we hijack the process of development to tell the body to develop according to given sex, that’s what their biological sex should be called, right? The clownfish that was once a male that changes into a female is a female. We don’t say it’s a male just because it once was one.

            I can’t say whether it’s offensive. I’m a cis man. The issue I do know is that it’s used by transphobes to pretend like they know more than they do and harm trans people. For example, congress’s anti-trans bathroom rule. Speaker Johnson said: “All single-sex facilities in the Capitol and House Office Buildings — such as restrooms, changing rooms, and locker rooms — are reserved for individuals of that biological sex” He’s using the term as a weapon, not as a descriptive tool.

            Where it’s most important is for doctors. My understanding is assigned sex at birth and medical records and understanding who the person is now is the useful information. They do need to know sex assigned at birth, and they also need to know if they’re on HRT or have had other procedures. They have to treat trans people differently than their sex at birth because biologically they are different.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              edit-2
              27 days ago

              You are claiming that biological male and female has no use because of the edge cases where its not so clear, but its still useful most the time.

              Besides, assigned at birth is pretty clear too. Doesnt say assigned at birth and can never change or assigned at birth and we are super sure.

              You can’t just say people can’t use a bunch of words because transphobes have used it as an insult. The words are still meaningful, and hateful people will say literally anything. Why give them any power in the first place?

              If someone says some awful transphobic shit, then fuck their opinion and fuck them and move on with your day. They aren’t suddenly some messiah giving you gospel. Dont let them live rent free in your head.

                • nomous@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  27 days ago

                  Hey look the firing squad is starting to bend in towards itself.

                  We gotta make sure we use the right words before we can even begin to have a productive conversation, if those words change every 6 months that’s just too bad, use the current one or you’re a bigot.

                • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  27 days ago

                  Why would you assume I’m skeptical that trans people exist?

                  I’m skeptical of proposed solutions, but I am with anything. Put another way, I know the problem is real, but I wouldnt say the causes or solutions are well understood.

                  Additionally I’m concerned with the social pressure that is put on people to shut up and accept whatever a trans person tells you. That makes me skeptical that people are arguing unbiased.

                  Lastly, I dont like that we seem to be pushing ahead without proper scientific review (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/03/health/aap-gender-affirming-care-evidence-review.html).

                  I really hope we have all guessed right already, and I understand some might feel they have run out of time, but to me theres a lot of unanswered or unsatisfyingly answered questions.

              • bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                27 days ago

                Yeah the use of the word is in relation to the edge cases, where it is not useful.

                These discussions are around the edge cases. Use the accepted terms that experts use to refer to these people.

            • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              27 days ago

              You didn’t even debate my point. I was only referring to amab and afabs. I don’t care about the edge cases because they’re not part of the point I’m making. It’s been well known that individuals with XY chromosomes and a penis are biologically male a.k.a amab, so what’s the difference?

          • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            27 days ago

            Biological sex is not as cut and dry as you might think.

            Assigned male at birth is overall a better more descriptive term, as through medical transition trans people acquire different sexual characteristics.

            I’m not an expert in the field but this is how I’ve seen people more educated than me in biology describe it.

            • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              27 days ago

              Yeah. Biologically, my sex is distinctly transfeminine as someone post transition, before transition, I like many trans people was some variety of intersex, but assigned male at birth puts me into the big bin that means what they were trying to say.

              Though also blaming trans women’s assigned sex at birth for willingness to vote Republican is weird considering how much more likely cis women are than trans women to vote that way.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            27 days ago

            What about people with testis but no penis? What about people with XY chromosomes but a vagina? What about people with a penis and vagina?

            “Basic biology” is the problem. You think a high school course was enough for you to have a complete understanding of biology. Biology is complex and messy, which your class didn’t discuss. It taught rigid definitions, which don’t exist in nature. Hormones define biological development. Every individual has different levels of different hormones, and also things just happen strangely sometimes too.

            There’s also an issue with intersex people where some are born with both male and female genitals and the doctor (without consulting anyone else) may remove components the baby was born with to make them fit the rigid definition of male or female that they decided.

            Nature is complex. Not understanding the complexity is fine, as long as you don’t pretend to. If you insist that your understanding is complete though then you’re arrogant and ignorant. It’s best not to be that way because it prevents learning and improving yourself.

          • Fiona@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            27 days ago

            I haven’t even had bottom surgery yet, but thanks to HRT my metabolism is much more in line with that of a typical woman than that of a man. Meaning that it is much more accurate to refer to me as a biological woman than as a biological man. So saying I’m the later isn’t just insulting, it is even scientifically incorrect. A trans woman who has received bottom surgery is in fact for pretty much all intents and purposes the same as a cis woman who has received a radical hysterectomy. Unless you call that kind of cis woman a biological man, doing the same to the trans woman is just as nonsensical.

            And yes, this really affects pretty much everything: The treatment of things like brain tumors depends on biological sex and if you treat a trans woman like a man you are going to see the same bad outcomes that treating a cis woman like a man would have. Because again: Trans woman are (from a certain point in their transition onwards) biological women. Yes, it changes, get over it.

            The reason to talk about amab/afab is specifically because they are the only terms that are reasonably consistent in all edge cases, except clerical errors.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              27 days ago

              Amab and afab are equivalent to biological male or female, just less explicit I suppose.

              Would you still argue that you are more biologically female than male if you considered that your DNA in every bit of your body still has the male set of chromosome?

              I’m not arguing against you, more so arguing that the distinction doesnt much matter and could be argued either way. I’d rather just take someone’s word for it when they say who they are. Thats the whole point isnt it, acceptance?

                • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  27 days ago

                  Just because someone is living this doesnt mean they have a full understanding of things. Skepticism is important, even more so from allies since they have the same goals.

                  Just because a transphobe has said something doesnt mean someone else saying a similar thing has the same intent.

                  I find it odd that this group thats trying so hard to stop being an out group, is one of the most aggressive at banning/labelling peolle and placing them into an out group.

              • Fiona@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                27 days ago

                Amab and afab are equivalent to biological male or female, just less explicit I suppose.

                That’s the point: They are not! Any sensible interpretation of a biological sex has to look at the whole system and we have comprehensively proven that biological sex can be changed. It’s a spectrum to begin with. Refusing that is like refusing that irrational numbers exist and claiming that every number can be written as a fraction: Understandable if you subject-matter education ends in 7th grade, but not if you actually looked into somewhat deeper at all.

                Would you still argue that you are more biologically female than male if you considered that your DNA in every bit of your body still has the male set of chromosome?

                For starters, define male set of chromosomes. If you say XY, then you will be interested to learn about De-la-Chapelle-Syndrom and Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome.

                But even if we put that aside, the thing is: Chromosomes really don’t matter all that much. The relevant differences primarily lie with organs and hormone-levels. Now, there are things you can do with gene-therapy (there was for example that trans girl who used CRISPR on herself to get her testicles to produce E instead of T). So it’s not that they don’t play any role at all anymore when you are an adult, but what matters much more is the overall metabolism and HRT is absolutely capable of switching that around.

                Like: Name the difference between a post-op transwoman and a cis woman who received a radical hysterectomy. Their metabolisms are functionally identical and both will have to substitute the same amount of Estradiol, because both lack ovaries. Chromosomes really don’t affect anything here, so insisting that they create a biological distinction, when they clearly don’t have any effect anymore is completely arbitrary.

                I’m not arguing against you, more so arguing that the distinction doesnt much matter and could be argued either way. I’d rather just take someone’s word for it when they say who they are. Thats the whole point isnt it, acceptance?

                The thing is: That is about accepting someone’s gender, which is usually indeed the more important thing.

                But biological sex of course also exists and the important thing for many of us is that it can in fact be changed and the claim that it can’t is deeply problematic and harmful.

              • Fiona@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                27 days ago

                There’s a lot of trans-medicalism in your post comrade.

                Not really, no. I’m talking about biological sex, not gender.

                A trans woman is a woman, full stop.

                For non-medical and non-biological cases: Yes, and no one say disputes that.

                The thing is that there are some people who don’t believe that for the other cases. I’m pointing out that while it is indeed a bit more complicated and takes some work to fully get there, trans women can even medically/biologically be women.

                HRT and bottom surgery doesn’t define a person’s gender. Only affirm it.

                Indeed. They change the biological sex, which helps affirming gender.

                That said, I do like pointing out to transphobes that I have less testosterone and more estrogen than my afab girlfriend thanks to gender affirming care.

                Which makes you biologically a woman. I really think we should hammer that point home and not let people get away with it by limiting our criticism to the choice of words, when we are scientifically in the right.

          • Fedizen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            27 days ago

            Its because sexual differentiation is many process that starts with an SRY gene and ends with hormone receptors all over the body. Evolution also acts on all of it at each step of the process. A good example is like chest hair patterns on men which are all over the place.

            You can have a penis if the correct receptors are triggered while still not having testes or an SRY gene.

            Evolution also has examples of creatures that evolved so that both sexes (hyenas) or none (many birds) have a penis in different creatures and where sexuality is environmentally determined (turtles). These evolutionary pressures that created all these animals may be acting on humans also.

            Which all comes down to the idea that the way we treat people is socially constructed. Like we don’t want murder so we lock up murderers.

            People who want to legislate biological binaries are saying there’s an inherent danger to society in allowing the edge cases to exist. I and many others would argue this is a kind of short-sighted eugenics program that disallows human diversity for purely aesthetic reasons.

            The results are like intersex babies getting gruesome gender assignment surgeries to fit better into the binary so when scientists later poll people they get results created by the binary. We’re sort of basking in our own farts when we talk about biological sex.

            Edit: it appears the person we’re replying to is uninterested in factual discussion and is just here to reinforce his own hateful worldview.

          • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            27 days ago

            Small matter of clarification. Liberal and far left are as far apart as liberal and far right.

            • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              27 days ago

              I know you’re a Marxist, and disagree with the typical definitions of leftist politics, i was just trying to refer to those at the tail end of liberalism.

              • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                27 days ago

                But marxist, liberal, and leftist are different words. And the correct term for me is libertarian. I am a libertarian.

        • Trae@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          27 days ago

          Who assigned them male at birth? What if they were raised like a cisgender female typically would be in our society?

          What makes someone “assigned at birth”? Is it dressing in masculine clothes, is it having a name like Michael and Billy, is it having a circumcision? These can all be comingled with other variations of child rearing.

          Just because a parent assigns a “gender” at birth doesn’t make it someone’s actual identifying “gender”. As a young child they have no say in the matter and it’s quite frankly wrong to whitewash their childhood history and personal trauma like that.

          Now that you’re more informed, I hope moving forward you stop trying to erase people’s adolescent psychological adversity.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            27 days ago

            Assigned at birth is referring to what the doctor writes on your birth certificate. It’s not complicated. It has nothing to do with gender.

            • Trae@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              27 days ago

              If you ever find yourself wondering why there’s people out there that don’t speak up about trans hate, just go reread your original reply to me. My comment was nothing close to hateful or bigoted, but you’re not gonna tolerate wrong speak on lemmy.

              You clearly could see where I was coming from and where my support is directed. Instead of total indifference to my comment, which would have been the bare minimum amount of attention you could give to it. You decided to take umbrage with me saying “biological” instead of what makes you happy and throw out intersex groups that make up a fraction of a percent of the entire population like an uno reverse card.

              Then to cap it off you made sure to declare that I’ve been “properly educated”, so sayeth you. So from here on out, I need to use the right language or… else?

              I’m not quite sure what your final edict was supposed to imply. That if I don’t use the right language my trans friends won’t talk to me anymore? I’ll get kicked out of the gay club?

              Instead of leaving it, you had to make it a point to punch down on someone who isn’t as “informed” as you and put me on blast like I just said the N word equivalent for trans persons.

              Seriously, it’s great you want to help spread awareness, but damn you took a super hostile and adversarial tone right off the bat.

              Just calling my shot here. I wrote all this out on my phone and it will not be well received despite the fact that there’s members of trans alliance and advocacy groups who disagree with your position and disagree with the use of “ASAB”. There’s people within the community who dislike using the term trans as a catch all.

              Where do you personally draw the line? Are you going to stop saying ASAB now that you know some people don’t like it? Are you going to keep saying “trans” even though some people feel like it marginalizes the community and feels too informal to discuss complex gender identities?

              Gender Dysphoria Alliance

              The Problem with saying ASAB

              Columbia Law Review

              For whatever reason people online are more interested in being outraged.

              • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                27 days ago

                I didn’t take umbrage with your original comment. I just pointed out that it’s wrong and you should stop. I was annoyed when you seemed to double down.

                Intersex people are just clear that “basic biology” is a non-functioning understanding of what biology is. Intersex people couldn’t exist if what you learned in high school bio was the end. It’s a clear indication that sex is not just some binary thing. It’s a very complex thing. Even non-intersex people have different developments in the growth due to different hormone levels and other things, and we can even control hormone levels artificially. It’s very complex, and the only useful term is AFAB/AMAB, and then more detailed medical records.

                Then to cap it off you made sure to declare that I’ve been “properly educated”, so sayeth you. So from here on out, I need to use the right language or… else?

                Yeah, use the more accurate language, or else we know you’re choosing not to. Nothings going to happen. Everyone gets to make choices in life. I can’t make you do anything, but from one cis-gendered person to another, it’s not difficult to be better. It’s just a choice.

                You’re getting really offended by someone just informing you the language you used was wrong. It wasn’t even a particularly insulting comment.

                Where do you personally draw the line? Are you going to stop saying ASAB now that you know some people don’t like it? Are you going to keep saying “trans” even though some people feel like it marginalizes the community and feels too informal to discuss complex gender identities?

                I rarely have a use for either term, so I draw the line where it’s useful for others. If you’re a doctor, that’s where it matters, and after gender confirmation, your “sex” is a lot more complicated. After a while or hormone therapy, you’re more akin to your chosen sex than your birth sex. That’s why the “biologically male/female” term isn’t useful. It’s assuming their birth sex is their current sex for medical purposes, but it’s more complex than that. Sex assigned at birth is useful because it limits it to that period specifically, and your medical records tell the whole story.

                The AEI article you posted seems to ignore this fact. It seems to say your birth sex is the important factor. It’s just one of many. For future development, the one your hormones correspond with is likely more important.

                The CLR article mirrors what I’ve said earlier:

                “By referring instead to sex assigned at birth, transgender rights advocates convey that “biological sex” is not simple, static, or binary and that gender identity also has biological aspects.”

                For whatever reason people online are more interested in being outraged

                I agree. People should be more calm, even when corrected. Being outraged doesn’t help. It only acts to cement our mind in preconceived ideas. Changing our minds when provided more information that counters our previous beliefs is something that should be commended, not fled from.

                • Trae@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  27 days ago

                  Got it.

                  I apologize.

                  You’re a the most qualified person on the internet for cisgender, trans, and intersex word policing.

                  Now that I know and if I don’t change, you’ll make sure to report it to the cisgender police for trans activities special victims unit…

                  It’s interesting you chose the statement “it’s not difficult to be better, it’s just a choice”. You could have started this entire interaction with “hey dude, just a heads up that a lot of transphobes use phrases like ‘biological male’ to invalidate trans identities”, but instead you took the opportunity to speak down to me and made sure I was now “educated” and that I can stop using wrong speak.

                  Thank God you’re here as an ally to make people question why those of us on this side of the fence can’t even get along internally.

                  • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    27 days ago

                    You’re a the most qualified person on the internet for cisgender, trans, and intersex word policing.

                    I definitely am not.

                    Now that I know and if I don’t change, you’ll make sure to report it to the cisgender police for trans activities special victims unit…

                    I haven’t reported or downvoted you.

                    It’s interesting you chose the statement “it’s not difficult to be better, it’s just a choice”. You could have started this entire interaction with “hey dude, just a heads up that a lot of transphobes use phrases like ‘biological male’ to invalidate trans identities”, but instead you took the opportunity to speak down to me and made sure I was now “educated” and that I can stop using wrong speak.

                    I don’t think I spoke down to you, but you are welcome to your opinion. I tried to inform you.

          • melvisntnormal@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            27 days ago

            I’m not a trans person, but I’m pretty sure that “assigned X at birth” refers to whatever gender is assigned on one’s birth certificate.

          • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            27 days ago

            Man, just reread what was shared with you and take the learning experience. You tried to be cute by making a mad-lib out of it and you sound way worse now than you did two comments up.

            Edit hours later after checking to see if my advice was heeded:

            • Trae@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              27 days ago

              Oh no, I didn’t heed my trans wisdoms lords advice and they’ve decided to deride someone for a singular word choice to make themselves feel morally superior!

              This will definitely advance the trans acceptance of the common person! Or maybe stay with me here for a moment, not everyone on the internet is as accepting as you are and when they see someone getting slammed for “wrong speak” it reinforces their shitty beliefs.

              “If someone who loves and supports trans people is getting shit on for saying a double plus ungood word by other trans allies, then why would I ever want to be a part of that.”

              I’ve heard these conversations verbatim from people I work with who hold actual hatred for trans people and trans acceptance. Once again though you’re all living for up votes and that brief instance you get to feel morally superior on the internet and share these snippets in your discord groups. This is clearly such a flippant topic for you that all you could muster up is a meme.

              • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                26 days ago

                If you’re taking a few online comments “from a perceived group” and labeling the entire movement and ideology of it bad because “they said mean things to me”. Well sorry pal, you were just looking for an excuse.

                Try talking to those co-workers and see how nice their word play can be. Should definitely join the people who hold actual hatred than to get over some language critiques so you can properly communicate with a minority group online. You are trying to just communicate right? Just as speaking to a professional or someone without your background you tend to communicate differently to be more effective right?

                I get it, you’re old-think and stuck in your ways. “I don’t actively harm people, so people shouldn’t be harmed by anything I do”. It’s so much easier to just blame everyone else and continue living in your bubble instead of actually learning new perspectives. People stay locked in their ways everyday, why should you have to be any different?

                If your intention was to sidetrack any conversation from the gun article and only have a debate about trans people, well you did a good job because all of that above is a hot mess I was not interested in after only a few comments.

                • Trae@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  26 days ago

                  Lol old think… Damn you really think you’re cooking with this one.

                  There’s so many broad sweeping assumptions in this comment that it would take an hour to properly address them.

                  I’m for trans expression, safety, gender affirming care, and right to live peacefully and safely.

                  I’m.for sweeping changes to firearm laws and way more gun control measures to prevent senseless deaths at the hands of firearms. Ideally the US would have laws like Canada or Australia.

                  This is exactly my point. This “perceived group” of people online would rather be outraged and morally superior by convincing yourselves that you found a top secret bigot on a mission to detail the thread instead of just looking at the first reply to my comment as what it is, someone being an asshole by talking to down to me about using wrongspeak.

                  Also, perceived group? It’s like 20 dorks on lemmy who enjoy talking down to others while jumping to conclusions without knowing who they’re talking to at all. It has nothing to do with the gender identity movement as a whole. I form my opinions on that based on speakiny with my actual friends and family that are LGBTQIA+.

                  A simple “hey just a heads up, a lot of people avoid terms like biological male because its commonly used by transphobes to invalidate gender identities online” would have been clearly understood and accepted.

                  However, some people are so terminally online that they assume everything is a secret mission to destroy them from within. It seriously sounds like the reverse of the “George soros is paying libs to post these comments on reddit” crowd. I’m not saying that there isn’t people sea lioning out here and dog whistling, but you are on such high alert that you can’t even spot when someone is just being called out for simply being an asshole, because it’s on such a controversial and hot topic.

      • kipo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        32
        ·
        28 days ago

        Calling trans women biological males is transphobic hate speech. Not allowed here.

        • Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          27 days ago

          It’s entirely relevant to the conversation. She couldn’t get pregnant, so she didn’t give a shit that women’s reproductive rights were on the table until the leopard ate her face personally. I’m as left as they come, but the virtue signaling you just did is why so many people get so turned off by so much rhetoric of our political side.

          • kipo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            27 days ago

            It’s not virtue signaling. The language the other person used is what the republicans constantly say when they are describing trans women because they don’t believe trans women are women, and it’s used to take away the rights of trans people, and it’s working.

            There are plenty of ways to say that she isn’t cis and doesn’t have a uterus while being respectful – like I just did.

            I’m as left as they come, but the virtue signaling you just did is why so many people get so turned off by so much rhetoric of our political side.

            I think you want the trans community and its allies to not confront you on dangerous rhetoric then, while they constantly have to fight people on the left and right to keep from having their rights stripped away.

            Being an ally means being open to learning when we make mistakes, and the language the other person used wasn’t appropriate. I hope you and others here can understand why.

            • Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              27 days ago

              It was just plain virtue signaling. This comment you made isn’t quite as plain, but it still isn’t helpful.

              The difference is, in the first comment you just left it as, “not allowed here”, which is just signaling your virtue, and more importantly, not correcting or helping in any way. I implore you to explain why someone’s verbiage is wrong, not just shut people down with no explanation. Even in this comment, you didn’t offer an alternative for “biological male”, so the person you originally addressed likely will write you off, and keep saying it.

              Your approach is just ineffective.

              Educate, don’t berate.

              • kipo@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                27 days ago

                Even in this comment, you didn’t offer an alternative for “biological male”

                I absolutely did: “trans woman”.

                I was educating. It’s 2024 and trans people are dying and having their basic human rights taken away, due in part to the pervasive rhetoric I originally called out. I expect better of people, and transphobic comments on lemmy are not welcome and break the rule of civility in the lemmy.world news community.

                Also, you’re telling me - a trans person - that they are virtue signaling about trans issues.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      27 days ago

      Is there some republican legislation that makes gender affirming care impossible for a 63 year old?

          • formergijoe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            27 days ago

            The house just made it illegal for trans people to use the bathroom they want in the capital, and Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and West Virginia have banned people from changing their gender on their ID.

            Tennessee also requires an ID to vote, so if a transgender woman shows up with a big old “M” on her state-issued ID, some fake-news-stolen-election minded poll worker can keep her from voting.

            Granted, these don’t outlaw hormone therapy or anything, but these are gender affirming actions outlawed by the government.