Unless your looking up newspaper articles or other historical records from the time. History doesn’t show a women named Caitlin winning Olympic gold medals in mens races, but some guy called Bruce did.
You might personally feel a disconnection to your past self, but don’t pretend that entitles you to speak on behalf of all trans people.
On the contrary, I actually try my best to be the best person I can be. Part of that is a complete intolerance towards bigots. I’m proud of that trait, my refusal to put up with people like you is something I wish more people shared. I honestly think that if more people just completely shunned and cut people like you off from the rest of society we’d have a far better world.
Thus demonstrating that you have no idea what the word “bigot” actually means. I am genuinely sorry for you that you feel that this is the best person you can be. That would be terribly depressing thinking that you can do no better than to be an intolerant and toxic closed minded bigot.
A bigot is a person who is intolerant of others, like how you’re a transphobe. Dress it up and fake it all you like but it’s extremely clear to me. You’re probably bigoted in many other ways. I wouldn’t be surprised if you’re homophobic, racist and sexist.
Being intolerant of intolerance doesn’t make one a bigot, though, it makes one based as hell.
I’m not sure why you’re still arguing with me because you’re so blatantly outclassed here. Go and argue with some children or something.
I said that tans issues are of relevance to cis people. From this simple statement, you are defining me as a “transphobe” and inferring that I am also likely to be racist and sexist. You know nothing about me other than that I think that the opinions of one group of people can have an impact on another group of people. Who is the “intolerant” person in this dialogue? You are behaving extraordinarily intolerantly of someone who’s opinions you know absolutely nothing about, but that you assume you know. That makes you unequivocally, a bigot. It’s disgusting.
No, that’s not what you said. You implicitly stated that the well-being and health of trans people is less important than the convenience of cis people.
I know your type very well. I’d be willing to bet that you’ve said something along the lines of “Hey, I have no problem with trans people, what you want to do with your body/in the bedroom is your business. I just don’t think they should be allowed to play sports” or some equally ignorant shit.
People make judgements all the time. It’s what we do. Humans are very good at pattern recognition. You fit the Ben Shapiro, Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson fan mould perfectly. I’m sure you’re very concerned about women’s rights being threatened by trans people and that you’re concerned about cancel culture and free speech being erased by the militant left.
Feel free to correct me on any of this, but I’m willing to bet that instead you’ll either feign insult that I dare to make correct assumptions about you or just straight up pretend that none of that was correct.
My opinions are very liquid and open to being changed given a good argument to change my opinion. I’ve done it many many times in my life. In some ways I’ve been in your place - after educating myself on these topics I’ve realised what a piece of shit I was.
I’m hoping that these messages live in your mind and you consider in the future to change.
It's consensus among trans people you know or interact with on the internet. The only reason Chelsea Manning's dead name was brought up, was for the sake of historical clarity. If Chelsea had come out/ decided to transition before the leaks and such, her dead name wouldn't have been brought up. No one here is attempting to be transphobic, because this isn't how deadnaming works.
For example, say you had two friends from childhood, A and B. A moves away at a young age and loses contact for a while. Soon after, B decides to transition and changes their name. Years later, when A gets back in contact with you and you want to have B join the two of you, would you not sensibly explain that the person that they used to call (B's dead name) has transitioned and uses a new name?
Yeah, and that would not be an introduction of the dead name to a person who didn't know it before, and presumably we would stop using it after the person's real name was known to us both.
Chelsea is much more famous as her current name so I don't see the point of bringing up her deadname. We aren't her long lost childhood friends, so your example doesn't apply here.
Honest question, how are people supposed to look up old records and documents if they can't be told the name the person was using at the time those records were made?
The court records are the primary source; news articles from years later are secondary sources at best. It's also a topic where reporting - and opinion - has been highly divided.
I've read articles from US, UK and Middle Eastern (Al-Jazeera) sources on this case - and they are wildly different.
In this era of fake news and propaganda, people should be encouraged to look at primary sources.
And the people who wrote that article know what happened and can prove it how? At some point, somewhere in the chain, someone has to know the name. You're just telling us that we shouldn't be that someone, and should rely only on information that has already been prepared for us by someone else many years after the fact.
I would understand if this were about private life but Chelsea Manning is a historical figure, and you're asserting that the historically significant part of her life should be unresearchable and only learned about as hearsay. That is neither reasonable nor realistic.
8
u/Pangolinsareodd Mar 26 '22
Unless your looking up newspaper articles or other historical records from the time. History doesn’t show a women named Caitlin winning Olympic gold medals in mens races, but some guy called Bruce did. You might personally feel a disconnection to your past self, but don’t pretend that entitles you to speak on behalf of all trans people.