To Seem, Rather Than To Be? (Trans Ideology)

[RDKirk]

Then why are you calling it "trans ideology"?


Because not all of it is restrictive or negative. A lot of it isn't even "Girls can't Y". A lot of it (maybe most of it) is just "Girls like X, boys like Y" stuff. But that's still putting attributes that have nothing to do with biology onto gender.

So this indefinable, subjective view of what makes someone a "man" or "woman" was made up way before trans people had anything to do with it, and mostly everyone is still pushing it to some degree.

Who invented it is irrelevant to the point.

The point is that trans people necessarily use traditional gender roles and behavior in their daily functions--they have to adopt traditional gender behavior to be "trans" -- but then they (or at least the ones holding the microphone) disavow gender roles and behavior in public ideological discourse.

 

[Moral Orel]

Who invented it is irrelevant to the point.

I don't really care who started it either. I'm talking about who is (present tense) pushing the idea that there are non-biological, completely subjective attributes to the concepts of "man" and "woman". And it's mostly non-trans folk.

 

[RDKirk]

I don't really care who started it either. I'm talking about who is (present tense) pushing the idea that there are non-biological, completely subjective attributes to the concepts of "man" and "woman". And it's mostly non-trans folk.

Are you saying, then, that trans folk are mostly pushing the idea that the concepts of "man" and "woman" are strictly biological and objective attributes? Is that what you're saying?

 

[Ken-1122]

Then why are you calling it "trans ideology"?

I didn't call it trans ideology, I said it is used to explain and justify trans ideology.

Because not all of it is restrictive or negative. A lot of it isn't even "Girls can't Y". A lot of it (maybe most of it) is just "Girls like X, boys like Y" stuff.

Is it usually girls like X and some boys like also? Or only girls like X and only boys like Y; because if you are saying only boys like Y, to me that sounds the same as girls can't Y.

 

[Ken-1122]

I don't really care who started it either. I'm talking about who is (present tense) pushing the idea that there are non-biological, completely subjective attributes to the concepts of "man" and "woman". And it's mostly non-trans folk.

There are a lot of non-trans folk pushing the trans ideology also. From what I've seen, they are usually progressives.

 

[didactics]

It is my conviction that if I oppose transgenderism then under no circumstances should I use preferred gender pronouns (PGP). In an article titled, Intersectionality and the Church, “We are told that good neighbors lie to each other like this, pretending that women can be men and men can be women. We are told that a homosexual orientation is indelible and permanent, but biological sexual difference is a matter of personal opinion.”

[tabletalkmagazine.com]

But am I taking it far enough? What about gendered proper names? There are many names that are gender-specific. Most languages are gendered languages and have gender forms in the parts of speech, notably in nouns. A name is a proper noun.

 

[didactics]

About trans ideology

Quoting from an article by Rosaria Butterfield

“It wasn’t until 1963 that gender began to refer to social attributes that differed from biological sex. This new definition was used by Second Wave Feminists, such as Kate Millet and Simone de Beauvoir, to miscategorize gender as the cultural manifestation of biology.”


Speaking of second-wave feminism:

“Transgenderism emerged from this feminist political rejection of the creation ordinance that says God made human beings male and female, so their biological sex and not their internal feelings determines their maleness or femaleness. Transgenderism, instead, argues that our internal sense of self is what makes us men or women.”

What Is Transgenderism?

 

[Kylie]

Isn't the whole idea of trans ideology about putting people in boxes and labeling them?

It's about the person being able to say, "I don't belong in the box you placed me in, so I'm going to find my own place to be."

 

[didactics]

It's kind of like this,
Transgenderism is about enabling someone’s envious desire for another’s sexual anatomy— to be in another’s box. The reality is that we have certain natural constrains that’s really for our own good. Trans activists ally with self-determined persons that choose their own gender expression. This liberation from the gender norms supposedly sets them apart from the boxes by redefining the boxes (which really just puts them in more boxes. Kind of like these rows of boxed texts).

 

[Ken-1122]

It's about the person being able to say, "I don't belong in the box you placed me in, so I'm going to find my own place to be."

But I'm not the one putting them in a box! As a matter of fact, I'm the one trying to convince them there is no such a thing as a box.

 

[Moral Orel]

Are you saying, then, that trans folk are mostly pushing the idea that the concepts of "man" and "woman" are strictly biological and objective attributes? Is that what you're saying?

No. I didn't say that at all. I said most people push the idea that "man" and "woman" are not strictly defined by biology. Most people are not trans. So most people pushing the idea are not trans people.

Using "man" and "woman" in ways that don't involve biology at all is already common language. Stop acting like trans folk are trying to redefine words.

 

[Moral Orel]

There are a lot of non-trans folk pushing the trans ideology also. From what I've seen, they are usually progressives.

Conservatives do it too. Most everyone does it. It's normal to talk about "What makes a real man" and "What makes a real woman" and none of those conversations involve biology. The definitions of "man" and "woman" are already regularly used as completely ill-defined subjective terms. Heck, Christians are probably the biggest US group to support gender roles, and they're also probably the most likely group to be anti-trans.

Calling such talk "trans ideology" is disingenuous. We're all aware of plenty of other contexts that folk have no problem talking about "real men" and "real women" that has nothing to do with biology.

 

[Moral Orel]

I didn't call it trans ideology

the idea that there are non-biological, completely subjective attributes to the concepts of "man" and "woman"

There are a lot of non-trans folk pushing the trans ideology also.

Yeah, you're calling that "trans ideology". Stop lying, bro.

 

[Moral Orel]

Here's some "trans ideology" from Promise Keepers. According to them, Real Men Weep.

"...real men love deeply, real men cry when they’re in pain, and real men allow others to see their pain."​

So what do we call biological males who don't weep, or don't love deeply, or don't cry when they're in pain, or don't allow others to see their pain? They aren't "real men". Are they women? Is gender non-binary to Promise Keepers?

 

[Kylie]

But I'm not the one putting them in a box! As a matter of fact, I'm the one trying to convince them there is no such a thing as a box.

How about you let them find their own place, instead of telling what the places are?

And you have said many times that you would put them in a box based on their biology. If they have a penis, you will refer to them as male, even if they ask you to use feminine pronouns. Post 546. So not only are you very much putting them in a box, you aren't even putting them in the box they tell you they belong in.

 

[Ken-1122]

How about you let them find their own place, instead of telling what the places are?

As long as their own space keeps involving other people, those other people are gonna have a say in the type of space they find. Perhaps they need to find a space that does not effect others.

And you have said many times that you would put them in a box based on their biology.

Biology IS a box, but they aren’t talking about biology, they’re talking about gender as a human construct.

If they have a penis, you will refer to them as male,

I said if they are a biological male, I will refer to their biology. I never even mentioned “penis” why do you keep bringing that up?

even if they ask you to use feminine pronouns. Post.

Why do they care what pronouns I use if I am talking to somebody else? Sounds like just another example of them finding their own space that affects everybody else. How ‘bout this; find a space that does not involve other people, and I will be more than happy to leave them alone.

 

[Ken-1122]

Here's some "trans ideology" from Promise Keepers. According to them, Real Men Weep.

"...real men love deeply, real men cry when they’re in pain, and real men allow others to see their pain."​

So what do we call biological males who don't weep, or don't love deeply, or don't cry when they're in pain, or don't allow others to see their pain? They aren't "real men". Are they women? Is gender non-binary to Promise Keepers?

If I said "men use condoms" are you gonna assume those who don't are not men? Of course not! The same goes here; they did not address the biological men who don't weep, love or cry; they only mentioned the ones that do.

 

[o_mlly]

It’s also an attack on God’s very good design, that in the beginning he made them male and female. Even Jesus affirmed this (see Mt 19:4).

Communists, who now call themselves social progressives, plotting to undermine the society targeted for takeover have a playbook. After dividing the population into warring factions to encourage and complete the necessary revolution, ironically, they work to homogenize the people. Individuals don't play well in a collectivist community. Male and female, they claim, are just bourgeois standards and conventions.

 

[Ken-1122]

Yeah, you're calling that "trans ideology". Stop lying, bro.

The quote of mine you provided did not make your case, as a matter of face, in that quote I wasn't even referring to gender roles. Care to try again?

 

[Ken-1122]

Conservatives do it too. Most everyone does it. It's normal to talk about "What makes a real man" and "What makes a real woman" and none of those conversations involve biology. The definitions of "man" and "woman" are already regularly used as completely ill-defined subjective terms. Heck, Christians are probably the biggest US group to support gender roles, and they're also probably the most likely group to be anti-trans.

Calling such talk "trans ideology" is disingenuous. We're all aware of plenty of other contexts that folk have no problem talking about "real men" and "real women" that has nothing to do with biology.

Trans ideology is the idea that based strictly on what is going on inside of your head, a biological men can be women, and a biological woman can be a man. Provide examples of Christians and Conservatives making that claim.