|
Post by Killah Ray on Sept 8, 2015 13:00:33 GMT -5
the whole "i respect their decision but..." thing is honestly such a BS thing to say. it's just another way to say "i don't understand what you identify as and i refuse to even attempt to understand you" secondly, it's honestly amazing that a penis can scare people. also, does it mention if she's straight or queer? this changes things immensely also, but i guess if you're a close minded prick you automatically just close your mind and come to your own ignorant conclusions. i know it's idealistic (and also extremely impossible) but it would just be nice to live in a world where this wasn't a big deal. to me it isn't but apparently it still is? this saddens me.... idk... i guess i can't put my feelings into words. Reading is fundamental as it was stated she has a girlfriend and to me that makes the situation that much more difficult.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Sept 8, 2015 13:15:43 GMT -5
the whole "i respect their decision but..." thing is honestly such a BS thing to say. it's just another way to say "i don't understand what you identify as and i refuse to even attempt to understand you" secondly, it's honestly amazing that a penis can scare people. also, does it mention if she's straight or queer? this changes things immensely also, but i guess if you're a close minded prick you automatically just close your mind and come to your own ignorant conclusions. i know it's idealistic (and also extremely impossible) but it would just be nice to live in a world where this wasn't a big deal. to me it isn't but apparently it still is? this saddens me.... idk... i guess i can't put my feelings into words. As a trans woman, she is already queer by default. The term's become a catch-all for anyone who isn't heterosexual and cisgender.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Sept 8, 2015 21:06:23 GMT -5
It really isn't, because issues relating to the exaggeration of the supposed threat are also relevant, and by comparison the marginalisation of other more likely threats. That presumes that people marginalize threats solely by talking about other presumed issues, as though there's only ever one issue anyone could be concerned about. The entire issue at hand is whether these girls should be uncomfortable in a dressing room with a TG student who still has male genitalia or hether the school should take this into account when deciding what to do in this situation, the fact that sometimes girls get molested by males outside the bathroom doesn't address either of the two main elements of the story.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Sept 8, 2015 21:24:41 GMT -5
That appears to be happening here. Focusing on a red herring threat while not acknowledging the more probable sources of molestation, which is not likely to be a transgender student in a dressing room.
No the entire issue should be about whether these girls have reasonable cause to be concerned. As I see it, it seems that their only justification appears to be the mere presence of the transgender student in their dressing room. Is there any evidence to suggest this person will be a threat? If not, then their discomfort is based on paranoia.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Sept 8, 2015 21:54:23 GMT -5
That appears to be happening here. Focusing on a red herring threat while not acknowledging the more probable sources of molestation, which is not likely to be a transgender student in a dressing room. People are focusing on the topic because that was what the thread was about it was what the protest was about, and it was about what this particular battleground of transgender rights was about. Introducing the argument that teachers sometimes molest students is an irrelevant conclusion. No one has denied that adults in power sometimes abuse children, no one has suggested that we make it easier for adult teachers to abuse children to talk about this situation, nor does the fact that adults sometimes abuse children alter the narrative of this protest at all. It's not a red herring to discuss the actual issue. No the entire issue should be about whether these girls have reasonable cause to be concerned. As I see it, it seems that their only justification appears to be the mere presence of the transgender student in their dressing room. Is there any evidence to suggest this person will be a threat? If not, then their discomfort is based on paranoia. How exactly do the questions of "should these girls be uncomfortable" and "do these girls have reasonable cause to be concerned" differ? I'm legiimately confused as to how these questions are really any different in regards to the issue, especially when the answer to both s pretty much the exact same "statistically, no." And it's not like I disagree. In a typical situation, these girls don't have anything to worry about and this would be paranoia.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Sept 9, 2015 10:50:16 GMT -5
And all these things must be questioned in terms of validity, which includes wider context, if fear of molestation is their concern.
It is a red herring. If they are concerned about being molested, there's no reason why a transgender person should be the only focus of their concern, when far more likely sources may exist, especially when those concerns about the transgender person are unsupported.
Because mere discomfort is arbitrary. There needs to be a verifiable reason and just cause to support what exactly they are uncomfortable with. If it's the fear of molestation, they need to provide some sort of evidence and justification to show that is even a likely danger in this case.
So what are they concerned about?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2015 11:48:43 GMT -5
Find me documentation that trans females are responsible for a similar level of rape/violence to cis men. Or cis women, for that matter. Find me the cases of trans women attacking people in bathrooms. There have been people trying to say it over and over with shared bathrooms/toilets, but they've never been able to come up with a single drop of evidence. And until you do, painting trans women as rapists/violent is transphobia in action. You seem to be going the opposite direction and stating that trans women are completely incapable of committing these acts. It is not transphobic to construct a hypothetical scenario. We have to consider things from all angles in this situation, and that includes things that can potentially go wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2015 12:01:21 GMT -5
the whole "i respect their decision but..." thing is honestly such a BS thing to say. it's just another way to say "i don't understand what you identify as and i refuse to even attempt to understand you" secondly, it's honestly amazing that a penis can scare people. also, does it mention if she's straight or queer? this changes things immensely also, but i guess if you're a close minded prick you automatically just close your mind and come to your own ignorant conclusions. i know it's idealistic (and also extremely impossible) but it would just be nice to live in a world where this wasn't a big deal. to me it isn't but apparently it still is? this saddens me.... idk... i guess i can't put my feelings into words. As a trans woman, she is already queer by default. The term's become a catch-all for anyone who isn't heterosexual and cisgender. some of us, me included, do not identify as that term. it's still widely used as a slur and is only considered a positive term by those who choose to reclaim it.
|
|