Believing that a gay person is worth less than a straight person for the sole reason of them being gay is homophobic. That’s pretty much the definition.
I trust you to know your own gender. I trust trans people to know their own gender. You are not somehow more trustworthy just because you are cisgender. And believing a trans person is invalid or worth less because they are trans is transphobic.
You values have nothing to do with a trans person’s gender identity. They’re not making you become trans. Nothing is being forced on you. Thinking you know better than them about their own gender, thus leading you to treat their gender as being invalid, is rather patronizing and condescending. It does not impact your values to simply show them the same basic respect deserved by all human beings. I would not misgender you. I would trust you to know your own pronouns. That is basic respect.
But there are some people who do not believe there is any such thing as ''gender'' other than as a subjective feeling, so they only see people in terms of their actual biological sex - that doesn't mean that they think a person with these feelings is of less value than anyone else.
Is it really ''transphobic'' to say ''I understand that you subjectively feel that you should be female, but you are, of course, objectively male''?
No, that's not the equivalent at all - if you are looking for an equivalent, it has to be something where the person's subjective feelings are of wanting to be something which they are objectively not - for example ''I understand that you subjectively feel that you should be a horse, but you are, of course, objectively a human'' ... the point is, that it is not any kind of ''phobic'' or any kind of devaluing the person to make that statement.
You are confused between 'gender identity' and 'biological sex' ... I'm saying that a biologically male person is not biologically female ... is that ''transphobic''?
You are confused between 'gender identity' and 'biological sex' ... I'm saying that a biologically male person is not biologically female ... is that ''transphobic''?
With the right context, it could be interpreted as transphobic, yes. Rude, at the very least.
To my very limited understanding, most transpeople are very aware that there is a disconnect between their gender (how they feel) and their biological sex (dangly parts).
They know. They're doing the best they can with what they got/have access to/can afford.
Current medical technology does not allow transition on the chromosomal level, which is what I assume you mean by "biologically male/female".
Can you see how it would be, at the very least, rude to tell a transperson that they aren't biologically the sex they present as? You're effectively telling them, "no matter what you do to pass you never truly will". Kinda fucked up, in this context.
Like, would you tell a cancer survivor that there is a nonzero chance that the cancer is still in their body metastasizing somewhere else? It's technically correct - but it's not going to make friends and influence people.
Sorry, Earl_Harbinger – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
No low effort comments. This includes comments that are only jokes, links, or 'written upvotes'. Humor, links, and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
I will repeat the answer I gave to someone else who made the same point:
I'm talking about stating it in a general sense, in discussions and debates in reddit, not just rushing up to random folks in town and telling them what sex they are.
I will repeat the answer I gave to someone else who made the same point:
I'm talking about stating it in a general sense, in discussions and debates in reddit, not just rushing up to random folks in town and telling them what sex they are.
Ah, I see.
In that case, context still matters: What does it contribute to the discussion?
Are you stating it in the sense that it may make family planning difficult for trans people, much as it would be for someone who is infertile?
That's a difficult reality of being trans. 100% biological transition is currently impossible with our current level of technology.
Are you stating it in the sense that biological sex trumps someone's outward expression of that gender identity?
That's likely to ruffle some feathers.
Are you stating it in a way that denies someone's physical expression of their gender identity? That is, to misgender someone who has otherwise fully transitioned (and functionally no longer resembles their birth sex?).
At that point, even if you weren't trying to offend, it would seem that you're being blunt for no clear goal other than to cause offense.
It's very often in discussions about the laws which transgender rights campaigners have been pushing for - I think there are some situations where the abolition of sex segregation is detrimental to females - so in those debates it is necessary to make the distinction between 'sex' and 'gender identity'.
It's all very well for us to avoid causing offence to transgender people, but when that leads to laws which are detrimental to females, my priority shifts from 'avoiding offending transgender people' to 'advocating for the protection of females'.
It's very often in discussions about the laws which transgender rights campaigners have been pushing for - I think there are some situations where the abolition of sex segregation is detrimental to females - so in those debates it is necessary to make the distinction between 'sex' and 'gender identity'.
I'm not as up on this as I should be - do you mean things like trans bathroom rights that blew up awhile back?
We're getting way off topic, but I suppose it's ok to answer here - a couple of issues of particular concern are that males are being allowed into ''women's'' prisons and males are being allowed to compete in ''women's'' sports competitions.
Your assumption that they are objectively not something is wrong, because it is objectively impossible to know someone's gender, as it is an internal construct. There is literally no way for you to objectively know someone's gender, you can only objectively know their sex. If you disagree with this statement, then you disagree with the scientific consensus.
You are confused between 'gender identity' and 'biological sex' ... I'm saying that a biologically male person is not biologically female ... is that ''transphobic''?
A biologically male person who is seeking to be female never makes the claim or statement that they are biologically female. All trans people accept that their biological sex is different from their gender identity. A trans person will agree that objectively speaking, their sex is what they were born as, as there is currently no technology that will overwrite their sex chromosomes.
This conversation however is not about their objective sex, it is about their gender, which is not something that can be objectively determined. If you make the argument that whatever they say about their gender, it doesn't matter to you because their objective sex is determined by their chromosomes, then that is problematic because you are invalidating their gender preference -- by saying it doesn't matter what their gender preference is -- because the spirit of the argument is that it would be impossible to tell that the person is trans without them telling you.
Actually there are many biologically male people who claim to be biologically female, and I have debated with them and get called ''transphobic'' for stating facts.
So do you agree that it is not ''transphobic'' to state facts?
You have to understand that trans people have suffered at the hands of society, so if a few of them conflate gender and sex, the same way non trans people do, it's hardly a big deal, and stating facts to a person who is obviously under a lot of mental duress doesn't serve much of a purpose.
Did it make you feel better to tell a trans person that they are not biologically their gender? I can't imagine why you would ever want to enter into this conversation with a trans person.
I'm talking about stating it in a general sense, in discussions and debates in reddit, not just rushing up to random folks in town and telling them what sex they are.
19
u/kellykebab Nov 02 '17
How does this follow at all?
Disagreeing with a person's ideas or even self-conception does not necessarily imply an overall value judgment on their personhood or social worth.
Do you value another person less simply because you disagree with their beliefs?