Eunuch is not a third gender BBC

[User10fuckingmillion]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-asia-india-48442934

Obviously the British behaved atrociously (in general in India, and certainly in the case) I don’t think that’s in dispute.

But eunuchs (I.e a man who has been castrated, mostly for social purposes, and then is expected to perform) is not a third fucking gender. I really don’t think it was some nice cultural practice that needs to be defended now, which is the tone of this article.

For clarification, I don’t like the placing of modern ideals of choice of freedom of personal expression (to fit their trans narrative no doubt) onto what was hardly a pleasant historical practice. It’s not a “third gender”

I agree. Its insensitive and stupidity at best for bbc to suggest this. At worst its insulting and rewriting history. Some people argue that gender is innate. Failing to see how (most likely) forced castration is innate. Id consider eunuchs to be a form of torture and abuse and I cant see any man or boy willingly choosing it.

Eunuchs often dress up like women and describe themselves as being castrated or born that way. A disciple-based community, it has important roles in many cultures - from sexless people guarding harems to singing and dancing entertainers.

India has classified them as third gender, who are we to disagree ? Pushing Western ideals on another culture is so colonial I think.

In cultures in South Asia, they are thought to have the power to bless or curse fertility. They live with adopted children and male partners. Today, many consider eunuchs transgender, although the term also includes intersex people. In 2014, India's Supreme Court officially recognised a third gender - and eunuchs (or hijras) are seen as falling into this category.

The irony of you having read an article about the colonial oppression of a misunderstood and therefore reviled cultural practice and responding by misunderstanding and reviling that cultural practice is breaking my brain. Had you even heard of hijra people before reading this article? Have you made a study of the topic and come to conclusions based on actual historical and anthropological research? Or are you just another white person who thinks they know better than a colonised culture like the Brits described in the article?

There are plenty of western historical practices that I think are deeply unpleasant too.

Particularly, for instance, colonisation (and I get that the ‘barbaric’ practices of other cultures were used to justify mass murder). I just don’t think eunuchs had s vast deal of choice in their castrations-I think the article is trying to make out like it’s a trans thing.

As opposed to a power thing

And eunuchs were often slaves.

In India they are recognized as a third gender.

Shot down!! Lmao

But it was still (historically!) about the rich exploiting the poor wasn’t it (which happens time and time again in every country)

Yes, in India they are. Please don't parade Western assumptions and ignorance. It's the usual transphobic performativity on MN.

This is where the difference between sex and gender matters. They can be a third gender if that's how they want to describe themselves. They are not a third sex.

How is it that you think the BBC are to blame?

The article is misguided in using the word "eunuch" rather than "hijra", I think. Eunuch has a much wider meaning to English speakers than its Hindu hijra context, which is what the article seems to be about. Many eunuchs around the world were forced rather than voluntary, and well-informed English speakers are aware of that.

Ok I think I’ve been a bit thick sorry

In what way are the BBC supporting castration?

Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan all give hirja legal status as third gender as well as India.
They aren't slaves and it isn't forced castration. Some do work as prostitutes etc. but many are quite high status.

User10fuckingmillion

You really haven’t, head in over the FWR board on here, (in fact repost your aibu on there) you will find reasoned discussion on this.

Also using ‘it’s how they view it in India omg you racist’ is a piss poor excuse for defending the practice of castrating healthy young men.

Some cultures think paedophilia is ok- should we accept that because it’s their ‘culture’ ?

Ok I think I’ve been a bit thick sorry
Don't worry user10, I'm often a bit thick

Good on you, uset, for your humility

transphobic performativity - lol

The AIBU was that the BBC called Eunuchs a third gender, when they appear to be factually reporting a decision of the Supreme court in India to officially recognize hijra people as a third gender in India.
OP yabu about the BBC. If you want a discussion about the rights and wrongs of the existence of the hijra and their treatment in cultures in Asia, well that's another thread.