Thoughts on MNHQ's response to the Spartacus thread

It's a statement of scientific fact, not an assignation surely!

No because having particular genitals doesn't make you that sex does it (according to the New Truth). They have literally nothing to do with it, according to TRA.

It's usually easy to tell at a glance what sex to assign someone to at birth, yes, but that doesn't stop it being an assignation.

LauraRoslin Sex isn't assigned at birth unless the infant is intersex and/or has ambiguous genitals. It is observed. This assignation terminology has been taken from intersex circles, and been used by trans activists in order to encourage the (false) idea that biological sex is fluid, or a social construct.

What happens now re-inforces the stereotypes by enshrining the female deal as feminine, curvy, made up, heels. So many MTT talking about how being a woman is all about shoes, feeling pretty and so on.

With young children you have the my boy likes dolls and dresses and dance, therefore he must be "born in the body".

It pinkifies and glorifies the "high heel woman" image, which is nothing but a stereotype.

You aren't breaking down any stereotypes Bambini. You are reinforcing them. That much must be obvious to you at least.

Also I found this on Twitter.

LumpySpacedPrincess my own DC is struggling because people have been critical of his choice to knit saying its a 'girls thing' it's taken all summer and proof of fishermen making jumpers (sharing the pic because it's ace) just to get him back doing something he loves.
He hates contact sports too so joins in with the girls who skip or the very few boys who play D&D. He's called a girl often. This language isn't just coming from kids but parents too.

I want to know why it's even a problem what children choose to do? :(

Laura Maybe there'll be a better word or phrase someday for "sex assignation at birth matches this individual's perception of what their gender identity is"

That's the issue, most people have no perception of what their gender is. They simply have not spent the time gazing at their naval to reach a conclusion. They just are. The more gender is defined the narrower the parameters become and so more people fall outside them.

If there was a study, I'd imagine a lot of people with gender dysphoria would be found to be obsessive thinkers.

Housemouse I'm sorry you had to see the ignorance of someone like Fruit.

Those who claim to be standing up for sex workers are only doing so for the minimal percentage who are content with their work, not the 80-90% who are destitute, trafficked, suffering from addiction or all three. The idea that radical feminists seek to marginalise these women further rather than liberate them is the result of the most deplorable misogynistic propaganda.

I am really starting to get fed up with some of the funfems and their wishy-washy ideas about "empowerment" rather than wholesale liberation. I read somewhere that radical feminists want to get rid of all the shit women have to deal with - funfems want to spray perfume on the shit and call it a flowerbed. It seems pretty apt to me.

I've been wondering if this is the early, difficult time for breaking down gender and sex stereotypes. So many young people obviously not happy with the status quo. Maybe a journey where in the near future people won't be pressurised to conform to stereotypes or be consigned to a box. Maybe we need to go through this to get there.

Need to have a proper read and catch up after a busy weekend, but did hq address the "no one has been banned for misgendering"/posie situation?

It is pure misogyny isn't it. We're moving back to stiff gender boundaries, how many people are going to be worried if their girl likes to climb trees, then try to socialise her according to society's strict rules. Where does this leave butch lesbians or effeminate men, or just people who want to experiment.

But that is exactly how it's being used, to say that biological sex matches perception of gender identity. And many of us object to that because we don't really believe in a gender identity. We say we're women because we are in a physical and chromosomal sense - not assigned at birth btw, that term has been appropriated from intersex individuals - but that who we are is just our own personality and not about fitting in to a box on the socially constructed gender binary

It does for me winchester. Unfortunately "cis" is the tip of the iceberg, when you look at the misogyny levelled at women by quite mainstream parts of the trans community - witness the safe sex leaflet that said trans women have vaginas but women have "front holes"

It's pretty horrifying once you start looking

I would say woman, transwoman, man and transman. Does that not cover it.

DropYourSword [i]Autogynephile[/i] as a term probably does only apply to men; a woman with the equivalent fetish would presumably be an [i]autoandrophile[/i].

I have no idea how common either of those is.

How one deals with gender roles is a very interesting topic in itself, but it's outside the scope of what "cis" was intended to cover.

I don't know. Maybe there'll be a better word or phrase someday for "sex assignation at birth matches this individual's perception of what their gender identity is". It's happened with other concepts.

Just a question about the autogynepile thing...I've seen written in a number of places that this is exclusively something men do.
But often in my fantasies I am 'the man', complete with penis, abs etc. is it really not something other women do, or am I misunderstanding.

But cis assumes satisfaction and identification with the gender corresponding to the individuals biology and many of us don't accept that. We say we're women because of our biology only and in many cases we reject the boundaries that the female gender role would place on us. You could call it queering gender, or just plain old feminism would do really.

I prefer transfeminine vs woman and transmasculine vs man as it's a much more accurate description.

Well, no, because the prefix "cis" is used to describe both men and women (in fact, my impression is that "cis men" is a more commonly-used phrase than "cis women", although I have no statistics to back this up).

But woman would do.

I know quite a lot of trans people, and while the word "cis" does come up a lot in their conversation, it does so fulfilling the function of a neutral descriptor, not as any sort of insult.

(And yes, it's the same terms as used with respect to cis and trans isomerism - derived from the Latin prefixes in both cases.)

I have wondered that with certain TRAs LumpySpacedPrincess, if it's some sort of experiment. Especially those who work in relevant fields...

I refuse to enter a state of cognitive dissonance that reduces the rights of my entire sex.

That's the heart of the matter for me, in a nutshell. No one is going to gaslight or guilt trip me into that.