_anti

joined 6 months ago
[โ€“] _anti@novoa.nagoya 1 points 6 months ago

@throwaway349582390@discuss.online

"turning out" to "being" trans is no different than asking if you'll convince yourself someday that the word woman can actually mean some men, which is the same as with the tree, you'd have to include some fish in your concept of tree wich makes the word tree unusable to actually refer to trees. that and that you also convince yourself that you are one of these special men (or fish). inevitably this ends up in trans people claiming to be the "evidence" that woman does not actually mean an adult human female (with their corresponding primary and secondary sex, and reproductive caracteristics). more than being evidence of that they're actually the ones who enforce a rule that we shouldn't use words to refer to what they actually mean. language is mutable but sex is not, and corroding the meaning of words that are actually useful is an agression against those people that are using the unobfuscated words and concepts to actually gain some rights and comprehend sexism in order to help humanity outgrow it. to defeat sexism it is better that we actually know what we're talking about instead of making it more dificult for ourselves by adding exceptions and clauses to the meaning of words that refer some of the most naturally clear concepts in our existence

[โ€“] _anti@novoa.nagoya 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

@throwaway349582390@discuss.online

there's literally no requirement to be trans but to declare yourself to be so. there's no need for any sort of behavioural or biological prerequisite, that's why the concept is empty it literally can mean anything you twist it to be so long as you convince others to call you trans.

nothing can change your biological sex nor the fact that the sex you are determines so much of the way people interpret your existence, doesn't matter that you alter your appearance, you'll never pass, trans-identified folks may trick some who don't bother to pay attention to the obvious and evident sexually dimorphic caracteristics of a given person (bone and jaw structure, balding lines, voice tone, etc.) though this trick never lasts upon actually interacting with the person.

no matter how much makeup or surgery you get the sexual roles enforced to each sex are not going away with just believing sex isn't real or that it can be changed. MtF will always be read as male and have male privilege, the half of the population they belong to is that of men which are read as masters, and FtM will be read as woman to anyone who bothers to look, they'll be read as the slave half of the population. the fact that trans people can't shut up about being trans makes all of this more obvious tan it already is.

in the sexist culture the whole world lives in MtF are literally masters roleplaying as slaves which is in the end just another form to humilliate women. you may roleplay as a slave but a slave can never roleplay as master. the fact that this hierarchy exists is what makes people confused about their sex, some don't want to be masters, some don't want to be slaves.

but this isn't (only) up to the individuals. cultural and literal institutions exist to subject women. pretending to be a woman just because someone engages in non master-like behaviours such as dancing or wearing makeup and privacy-compromising clothing further reinforces the idea that women are slaves (and in consequence men are their masters).

to believe someone can "turn out" to "be" trans is to assume there is such a thing as being trans, that there is a process on the mind and body that makes someone be considered to be in a category they are not in. Declaring that a fish is no longer a fish because it is considered by some that it is a trans-tree and therefore a tree, doesn't make it not a fish neither does it make it a tree.

some people might think that such trans-tree is in fact a tree, which for them makes the word tree unusable because they have to include in that category things that are vastly different from trees, the word tree loses meaning on their minds. it is no longer able to refer to a real thing that is out there, because it's definition must now include things that are not trees (according to everyone else who may actually use the word to refer to something with distinct caracteristics)