Why the ultrarich come after trans people ?

[email protected]

oh I am the problem now? some of you people are hilarious. Touch grass

[email protected]

You're a massive transphobe, and that's a problem.

[email protected]

maybe there should be more tv shows or movies with trans ppl so we would relax a bit and ease it in ;DDDDD What do you think?

[email protected]

"but" is a bigot's favorite word!

[email protected]

It's a shield made out of tissue paper.

[email protected]

The wording is such that lends legitimacy to these viewpoints. The breakdown is right there for anyone who want to build upon this discussion, but it would be naive to give the benefit of the doubt to just anyone, when ignorance and misinformation is ubiquitous, nay, institutionalized.

[email protected]

All threaten the oldest hierarchy of all: man over woman.

Pretty much this. I remember being a teenager and hearing the most basic watered-down gender theory and being really confused and upset. Even back then I knew it was because, for it to be true, it meant a lot of things I take for granted about society were actually totally irrelevant. Unfortunately some people don't ever have to confront their cognitive dissonance, they just use their money and power to enforce the status quo they're used to.

Jk Rowling is a second wave feminist and she’s big mad that people without vaginas can call themselves women and be in women’s spaces.

Unfortunately you could have the best neo-vagina money could buy and terfs would still find an excuse to exclude you. It's not truly about genitalia, it's about being trans.

[email protected]

Trans people’s very existence requires the rest of us to question our own upbringing. There are a lot of childhood experiences that boil down to you doing something or not doing something on no basis other than the fact that you were told.

You were told by your family, you were told by your friends, you were told by random strangers, you were told by the media, and they were all telling you the same thing. So you listened, even though you didn’t know why they were saying it. Surely EVERYBODY can’t be wrong, right? Some people might have told you something contrary but they were the losers, the outcasts, the villains. You don’t want to be any of that, surely?

For someone to transition, they are required to do the exact opposite of what so many told us all. They embrace the very outcome we were threatened with when we failed to conform, that we would not actually be the gender we were failing to conform to.

To accept that they are valid in doing so requires us to admit that many of our own guiding forces were actually just bullshit. We have to question why we are the way we are anew. If what they’re doing is strong, what we did, what we’re continuing to do, was weak.

When confronted with the idea that we were all just raised wrong and that much of what we collectively spend our time and energy stressing about is stupid and pointless, how many people do you know that will just shrug and say “oh well” and then move on with their lives? Easier to find an excuse to keep doing what you were already doing. “They’re just lying because they’re perverts that wanna cheat at sports.”

Some of these rich people are insidious and manipulative, no doubt, but the loud ones are usually just idiots no different from the uncle you don’t want to talk to except that being rich means they’re able to yell louder.

[email protected]

In the core of this reasoning is the idea that “men are inherently dangerous to women” therefore “women must know at all times the biological sex of any person they interact with”.

I don't believe that, just to be clear. But I think that's the view of a lot of people, and that's what i was outlining. because that was relevant to OP's question.

So you can’t go past the “transition” history for reasons that under all other circumstances you would decry as “misandry”,

I will assume you are not talking about me here as you have no idea of my point of view on the matter. I believe you are talking generically...

even if you are talking generically, i don't think your assumption here makes sense. many people feel free to discriminate between people on the basis of their biological sex. there are many contexts where (for example) men will accept they are treated different but will not restort to calling this "misandry". at least in the settings i'm familiar with and amongst the people i've lived alongside here in London, UK. you may have very specific incidence in mind or may not be intending to speak universally, but you said "all other circumstances", which sounds pretty universal, so i'm just pointing out that's not correct..

entitled to hands down secrecy, given that a random bigot can just shoot them down for being trans with zero consequences.

I don't know where you live, but this is not true in the UK

while I agree with the thrust of what you are saying you have a writing style that puts words and assumptions in my mouth in a manner that comes across an unecessarily combative. you also use exaggeration to make your point which is itself problematic..

[email protected]

Gender is a load bearing brainworm for capitalist society. Capitalists need stratification, having a gradient of various degrees of precariousness for workers to experience that would push them into accepting a worse deal for selling their labor. Gender is clearly one of the primary ways to achieve this: an absolutely incredible amount of domestic labor is performed without compensation by women every day, and society would fall apart if it wasn't. The rigid structure of the patriarchy is a key feature of this system, which means that trans people represent a clear break in that logic; if AFAB individuals can just choose not to be subjected to gender-based exploitation, it starts to rip the whole thing apart. Equally, transfeminine people represent another break in the opposite direction. The patriarchy is more or less incompatible with the existence of trans people, at least without significantly transforming itself.

[email protected]

Scapegoating

[email protected]

I wouldn't say that JK Rowling was "going after" transfolk, she just didn't agree with their premise. I wouldn't go so far as to say that's hatred

[email protected]

Trans people: "I'd like to exist."

JK Rowling: "I don't agree with your premise."

Totally not hatred.

[email protected]

They will pick whatever group they think will suddenly put as many idiots as possible under their control when they say "GROUP A IS BAD".

They don't care they are trans, they only care that they can take advantage of the oppression of a minority group in order to consolidate control over people so that they can oppress more people.

When everyone alive and dead is either oppressed or under your control, you become god. This is the goal, but they don't care about the process to get there.

[email protected]

Strawman dark pattern, I see. Very nice.

[email protected]

Also, societal attitudes have changed to the point where at least open racism or homophobia aren't really acceptable any more. So they needed a new scapegoat.

[email protected]

Trolling and then playing the victim. Very nice.

[email protected]

That's not what a straw man is.

[email protected]

Not everyone who disagrees with you is trolling you. I've been speaking in a respectful tone. The rhetoric is all yours, friend.

[email protected]

It's called smokescreen. Turns the attention of the masses away of their wealth and power

agnos.is Forums

Why the ultrarich come after trans people ?