Gender swap situation

[TenThousandYears]

I know you're all probably fed up hearing about this subject...I just need to vent.

DD has been friends with "Sally" for 10 years. (Both 14) Since nursery. In the last few months Sally has decided to change gender and now wants to be called " Ron"

DD just can't wrap her head around this. If she slips up, she gets nasty looks from "Ron" and so she's treading on eggshells.

Ron's brother still refers to Ron as Sally so DD is very confused by it all.

I'm on DDs side. Personally, I would hate to be in her shoes right now. I think if you meet someone and are introduced to them as whomever then that's easier to accept than having to change names and pronouns of someone you've been friends with for 10 years. On TV shows people just accept this straight away and move on but I'm not convinced that it's really that easy.

I also think 14 is a bit young for these changes but that's just my personal opinion.

Are me and my child horrible people for not being able to accept this right away?

Really really they are not.

That's DARVO.

You aren't putting anything into historical context. You are just looking for transness.

DARVO?!

😂😂😂😂😂

Wikipedia actually has an excellent summary

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_history

I found this quite relevant to the discussion- “Genny Beemyn argues that transgender history has also been filtered through gay history, identifying Billy Tipton as an example of a historical figure misrepresented by scholars as gay when a transgender reading of his life would be more appropriate.”

When you have progressed past GCSE history instead of pseudo intellectual claptrap we'll talk.

Until then, we'll keep it at the level it deserves.

Chow.

Ok dear 😂

Which part is incorrect?

No, you have reported on recent interpretations which look at the past with trans tinted spectacles and miraculously change everything to ‘transgenderism’ which as a pp observed was invented somewhere between the 1960s and 90s.

There is a vast difference between the current situation, the Romans and men like Sylvia. None of them demanded society cater to their every whim or they would pour bottles of piss over themselves in public.

You are obviously a stranger to the internet and the varied news media. Honestly, you must have been living in a cave, if you've missed all the threats screen shotted from Twitter etc, assaults at women's gathering, frequently with the Police standing idly by.

The disgusting videos posted by men in Mark's & Spencers changing rooms, the ones in women's toilets, where they piss and worse on the seats.

Their confident bragging about it. MN is full of examples of these.

Sinnerboy I love the constant

"You don't know any trans people"

We live with them. They are colleagues and sometimes friends.

"But they are nice people"

We know. But sometimes misguided and sometimes still unreasonable in demands as a side effect of brainwashing

"But you can't know any bad ones"

Except the ones who have hurled abuse at us, tried to get family members ostracised from us, have used various forms of unacceptable behaviour towards us. Not to mention all the threats etc we've personally received online and ignoring all the ones we've seen directed at public facing women who have challenged this insanity.

Yep apart from all this, we've never come across a transperson and live in a bubble detached from the rest of the world.

It's ridiculous.

If yr going about calling peoples polite representations of their own thoughts ‘chow’ in real life I can see how that could be presenting you with some interpersonal problems

Nice.

When all else fails, resort to the personal attack.

Aaactually I was saying that I felt your reply to Tandora was a personal attack and that it made me wonder if the experiences you mentioned were perhaps reactions to behaving similarly in real life

That’s hardly a fair representation of the conversation 😆.

A pp insisted that being trans can’t be real, as if it were there would be evidence of it before the “90s” (which btw was long after contemporary medical/ scientific terminology for describing transgender variance was invented, but never mind) .

So I provided accounts from history that provide evidence of individuals who expressed a powerful desire or took extraordinary action to change their social, legal or anatomical sex.

Then it was declared that these can’t be true examples of trans variance as they existed in a different context and therefore the same ideas / terminologies can’t possibly be applied! I’m imposing labels on people / assuming categories. Oh and btw , fyi , these people are almost all in fact “gay”.

See how completely circular this is?

Oh and now this is all my fault and I’m stupid and DARVO.

😄.

Absolutely classic gender critical logic

I read that comment as a play on ‘ciao’.

It’s not calling anything ‘chow’.

Lolllll the only person personally attacking anyone is you.

Tandora has a history or deliberately missing the point.

Tandora is not demonstrating that they understand sourcing and bias in history.

There is little point in having an argument with Tandora for this reason.

Its fairly critical to the substance of the argument.

I didn’t. Maybe they have made other remarks that have been misunderstood and that’s why they think trans allies are so agressive to them

Oh give over!
People get accused of contempt just for not pretending to believe in it. Even here, youre picking up on her thoughtcrime arent you.

Breaking news! Forum user responds to post using WORDS! 😂🙄

If it helps your comprehension a little, I'll break it down for you. 'Are you suggesting that asserting that there are only two sexes and no one can change between the two is ‘blind arrogance’??' were your exact words in response to my post stating that people are entitled to call out blind arrogance. My point in asking you to show me where I'd brought up the sexes or changing sex, seeing as you appear to need it simplifying, was that I wasn't interested in debating that on this specific thread. My 'empty', 'wordy' posts made that abundantly clear in the first place, but hopefully I've now cleared up the confusion for you.

And for you to accuse me of policing, well... 🤷‍♀️

God must be real and ghosts must be real because believers in that sort of thing has existed throughout history

If your argument is that there was transpeople in Roman times, then you need to understand how anyone might have come to that conclusion and how sources are important.

The running theme through trans advocacy is the inability to understand bias.

The entire circus that was practice at the Tavistock was about the runaway train of bias to the exclusion of all over possible explanations and the complete dismissal of harms.

Transactivism is dishonesty personified.

Yes this is how you like to engage with me on every thread. By attacking my person instead of having a substantive conversation.

Tandora’s like this, Tandora’s like that…

For the lurkers at the back...

....we need to debunk nonsense.

I understand that the only accounts of this person are written by his enemies so the evidence has to be examined in that context. (The article I posted said exactly this.)
it doesn’t of course mean they aren’t true, and these are the accounts we have. the accounts are there and suggest that this emperor used female pronouns, wore female dress, called himself a woman and expressed a desire for genital modifications. At least one of the accounts was written for contemporaries which is thought to present evidence that at least someone of it must have some basis in truth.
regardless of this particular figure there are vast literatures containing similar stories across history and cultures. Yes you can find arguments/ ways of dismissing, offering a different interpretation , or undermining the “proof” of each one , that’s the nature of historical interpretation and engaging with historical sources, but to insist that there is no evidence of transness in history, compared to other axes of human diversity, and that therefore trans experience is not real in the same way that eg autism and sexuality is , just exposes an absurd degree of bias