FB Groups and JK

I'm perfectly able to, I just don't care to answer the same time-wasting question for the hundredth time.

Sure you are.

You sound very much like an undergraduate who has read some garbled secondhand theory and thinks it’s very clever, when in fact you aren’t really able to follow your arguments through to their logical conclusion.

Some of the things you suggest may well be true, but you’re arguing for several mutually incommensurable positions at the same time, which renders your argument incoherent. If you pick one idea and follow it through to its conclusion, you might be able to better see what you are arguing.

You also haven’t responded to some of the requests for definitions and clarifications. Can you define “identity”? How can “nonbinary” exist, and where does it exist? How is gender any different to other kinds of “identity”? Is it socially constructed or in the mind?

To regard trans women as "male" and demand them to be socially and legally categorized as such is to oppose trans equality.

But you're making the assumption that males being categorised as women has no effect on anyone else. It does. It affects women. So to make demands for these males without consulting women is treating those males as superior and women as an inferior category of people who are not allowed a say in how society is run.

Trans women are biologically male. This why they are trans.

Gender identity is a belief, I have no issues with other people having this belief but I don't share it.
I won't participate in compelled belief of any sort, I don't live in medieval times.

Speaking of rejecting labels, since you want to "reject gender", why don't you refer to everyone with gender-neutral terms like "they", "person", etc.?

Because in English, pronouns refer to sex, not 'gender'. We all have a sex and it can't be changed.

Almost like you're not actually "rejecting gender" but simply conflating it into sex, rebranding gender categories as "sex classes".

What do you mean by 'gender categories'?

"You are making the assumption that we all have a gender identity. I don't have a gender identity."

"So I'm not 'cis' because I don't have a gender identity. Nor do most people."

If you're calling yourself a "man" or a "woman", then that is your gender identity.

Even if you consider it non-existent simply because it's the socially mandated "default".

You're like a straight person insisting they have "no sexual orientation".

We don't have to refer to ourselves as 'cis' but only if we aren't cis.

I won't be referring to myself by an enforced, made up term. Couldn't care less how you refer to yourself but I don't subscribe to your ideological belief system.

No, thank you.

To regard trans women as "male" and demand them to be socially and legally categorized as such is to oppose trans equality.

Your gender identity (describing yourself as a "man" or "woman") is quite literally on the same side as what you were assigned, and is in alignment with the label that is socially mandated based on your physical characteristics.

You are making the assumption that we all have a gender identity. I don't have a gender identity.

If you aren't cis, i.e. your social identity doesn't match the category you were assigned at birth (whether or not you believe it's just the word for what was "observed"), then you don't have to be cis at all.

So I'm not 'cis' because I don't have a gender identity. Nor do most people.

The thing is, you want other people to act like you're something special, some great defier of gender roles, while you're staying perfectly within the confines of the socially mandated categories (and aggressively attacking those who don't stay within theirs).

How can you possibly know that about all the people posting on here?

Oh and another one, even within the same post:

“You quite literally get to define your identity yourself” (“using the terms and labels you’re most comfortable with”, remember?) — BUT also you don’t in fact get to define yourself, I get to call you “cis” if I like and you aren’t allowed to complain.

You couldn’t even make it up, the incoherence and silliness of it all.

*Nope, you quite literally get to define your identity yourself.

The thing is, you stick with the socially mandated "default", lash out at anyone who doesn't, and throw a fit whenever you're accurately described you with a word that simply means "not trans".

Because you being "cis" implicitly suggests being trans is something acceptable and equal to your state of being, and you can't have that.*

"The labels remain the same; you are just shuffling them about and pretending that’s some kind of self-determination. If you really wanted self-determination, wouldn’t you just reject the labels…?"

Everyone gets to use the labels they feel most comfortable with, and those who don't like either masculine or feminine labels can use neither.

Speaking of rejecting labels, since you want to "reject gender", why don't you refer to everyone with gender-neutral terms like "they", "person", etc.?

Almost like you're not actually "rejecting gender" but simply conflating it into sex, rebranding gender categories as "sex classes".

Not really, we just want you to accept trans people as equal. And yes, that involves accepting trans women as women.

I'm happy to accept trans people as equal, in the sense of having equal rights with everyone else.

Accepting 'transwomen' as women is different from trans people having equal rights.

In order to be a 'transwoman' a person has to be born male. So you want me to accept that a male person is a woman. But a male person can never be a woman because humans can't change sex.

Not really, we just want you to accept trans people as equal. And yes, that involves accepting trans women as women.

Except you have just said yourself that “woman” is a meaningless label. So how can we accept that labels mean everything and also at the same time that labels are meaningless?

If I say “trans women are not women, they are nonbinary”, and I think everyone is nonbinary, then why am I not accepting trans people as equal?

You’v argued in your own words that “These categories are imposed and enforced through social pressure” and that they are socially constructed and imposed. So logically by your own words, saying “trans women are women” is imposing and enforcing labels that you yourself have argued several times on this thread are meaningless.

Don’t you see all the logical incoherence and silliness about your position?

Labels are meaningless - unless I say so. You “impose binary terms” - but I “self determine” the sane binary terms (even when they are about other people). Gender is a binary but also a spectrum but it also doesn’t exist (unless we’re talking about trans people and then it does). Gender and sex are different - until I want to say they are the same.

It goes on and on and on.

"Cis is a made up nonsense term. It's a Latin prefix which means 'on this side of' which has been co-opted (incorrectly) as an antonym for trans."

How is it incorrect? Your gender identity (describing yourself as a "man" or "woman") is quite literally on the same side as what you were assigned, and is in alignment with the label that is socially mandated based on your physical characteristics.

"while simultaneously telling us that we must refer to ourselves as 'cis'?"

You don't have to, though? If you aren't cis, i.e. your social identity doesn't match the category you were assigned at birth (whether or not you believe it's just the word for what was "observed"), then you don't have to be cis at all.

The thing is, you want other people to act like you're something special, some great defier of gender roles, while you're staying perfectly within the confines of the socially mandated categories (and aggressively attacking those who don't stay within theirs).

You can be a biological male who chooses to live as a woman but it isn't humane to insist that means you should have the right to services alongside females harmed by males.

If you can't see that then some of your humanity is missing.

Y-yes? That's the fucking point? It's precisely about personal autonomy and self-determination.

Except that you’re just using all the same labels, but moving them around a bit. If you just rearrange literally the same labels, how is that self determination? You’re still obeying exactly the same rigid labels, even as you keep saying you’re being autonomous.

It’s like saying (as you did above) that stag and doe are meaningless labels, yet just randomly assigning the same labels to whichever deer you feel like, and pretending that if the stags don’t all have penises, that penises don’t have anything to do with “stagness”. Because there is an infinitely varied spectrum between having penises and not having penises (despite the fact that there seem to be suspiciously few deer who seem to fall between deer who do, and deer who don’t.)

The labels remain the same; you are just shuffling them about and pretending that’s some kind of self-determination. If you really wanted self-determination, wouldn’t you just reject the labels…? (Except then we’d be back at the old nonbinary problem again.)

No, it isn't. Stop wallowing in self-pity.

Attributing identities based on what you suppose to be another person's relationship with their body and the sex role stereotypes of their culture is presumptuous.

Would you like it if you were at a work dinner and a complete stranger ordered food for you without letting you look at the menu? That would be a bit presumptuous, wouldn't it?

Well, so is all this "cis-ing".

Read this. liberationcollective.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/a-feminist-critique-of-cisgender/

Cis is a made up nonsense term. It's a Latin prefix which means 'on this side of' which has been co-opted (incorrectly) as an antonym for trans. Can you really not see any irony in insisting that Nope, you quite literally get to define your identity yourself while simultaneously telling us that we must refer to ourselves as 'cis'?

Anyway, thank you for your services to lurkers. I lurked on here for about a year and posts like yours were what made me realise the inconsistencies with gender ideology. You will have informed many people here, just not in the way you think..

Neither of these words means anything to deers.
You are so right.
But deer like humans come in two sexes and recognize that easily.

It isn't complicated an archaeologist can tell centuries later what sex you are, it never changes.

You can choose to live as different gender but your sex will never move.

In the same way recognizing gay people as equal involves recognizing gay marriage as a legitimate form of marriage, no matter how matter how many times people repeat "marriage means union between man and woman".

Yes. They are literally labels assigned by humans. Neither of these words means anything to deers.

So are you going to take a vow of silence and stop using human language?

Or is it just the words describing the material reality of sex you have a problem with? The deer don't speak English, but they know what male and female are. The stags know who they butt antlers with.

"But you say you want self-determination and autonomy, yet are imposing those labels on everyone else. Oh the irony! 😂"

Nope, you quite literally get to define your identity yourself.

The thing is, you stick with the socially mandated "default", lash out at anyone who doesn't, and throw a fit whenever you're accurately described you with a word that simply means "not trans".

Because you being "cis" implicitly suggests being trans is something acceptable and equal to your state of being, and you can't have that.

Lashing out against the term "cis" is just a rehash of "I'm not 'heterosexual', it's called being normal!"