"One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5649
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Diadem » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:01 pm UTC

Brace wrote:It is a concern. The difference is, a transsexual can make choices in the context of this problem which don't effect their quality of life in any serious way and which also minimize their exposure to harm. They can choose only to act as if they belong to a different gender in the contexts where they receive the most enjoyment from it; in the bedroom, in gay safespaces, at BDSM events, and at other queer friendly events such as sci fi, anime, and furry conventions. Someone who can't control their visibility as a minority in public spaces can't minimize their exposure to harm in that way. My own response, for about 3 years, was just not to go outside except when necessary. Now I carry firearms and I'm actually able to go outside. Transsexuality is also a much more malleable behavior, as all fashion is malleable, so there is decidedly less urgency behind a transsexual not being able to act as someone from the opposite gender than there is behind the inability of most groups conventionally considered minorities to travel freely without fear of violence or to achieve other substantive ends that are important to them. I'm not contesting that murder is bad, or that the motives for violence towards the two groups are even different. Just, if you're in a leaky boat in the middle of the ocean with some other people, and someone helicopters down to you, and gets into your boat, and they have a radio they can use to call the helicopter back at any time, and you get indignant about it and they say to you "Don't get angry, we're all in the same boat" while gushing about how romantic and exciting all of this is and asking you why you don't just radio your own helicopter whenever you express that it isn't, that person may be exposed to a fair amount of the same type of risk as you are and for the same essential reasons, but they're still a fucking asshole.

Very well put. I can't believe I didn't think of this before. You are entirely right. People should just act normally. If they chose to not act normally, well, that's their own choice, and they shouldn't complain about the consequences. I mean, yeah, women and blacks, they can't help that they are what they are, they were born like that, so we should cut them some slack. But fake minorities like crossdressers or transsexuals, but also gays and muslims and atheists, they chose to be what they are, so I have no sympathy for them at all.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:07 pm UTC

Aside from drawing the line in the wrong place, and equating it to a condoning of harassment and violence against those groups, that's essentially correct yes.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

User avatar
Zarq
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:29 pm UTC
Location: Third Rock from Earth's Yellow Sun

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Zarq » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:09 pm UTC

Where should the line be drawn?
You rang?

"It is better to shit yourself, than to die of constipation." - Some picture on reddit

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:16 pm UTC

Well, there's a punnet square basically.

If it's not harmful and current scientific evidence establishes that it's not malleable or a choice, then discrimination is evil, because there's no escape from it and it has the potential to put people in double binds that can only end in extreme repression and self-hatred, concealment (if possible), suicide, murder, or other negative outcomes. If it's not scientifically established as non-malleable and not a choice, but it's not harmful, then discrimination carries disutility and it is still morally objectionable to engage in discriminatory practices, but on a lesser scale since the outcomes aren't liable to be as bad. Things like murder are of course still wrong because they are always wrong. Crossdressing fits in this category, as does religion, fashion sense, weight, hobbies, most habits, and most preferences.

If it is harmful but is scientifically established as not a choice, then discrimination for its own sake is still evil, but the situation requires that the person's autonomy be restricted to the extent necessary to mitigate the harm. If it's harmful and not established as not a choice, then and only then is discrimination is fully acceptable.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Роберт » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:26 pm UTC

Brace wrote:It is a concern. The difference is, a crossdresser can make choices in the context of this problem which don't effect their quality of life in any serious way and which also minimize their exposure to harm. They can choose only to crossdress in the contexts where they receive the most enjoyment from it; in the bedroom, in gay safespaces, at BDSM events, and at other queer friendly events such as sci fi, anime, and furry conventions. Someone who can't control their visibility as a minority in public spaces can't minimize their exposure to harm in that way. My own response, for about 3 years, was just not to go outside except when necessary. Now I carry firearms and I'm actually able to go outside. Crossdressing is also a much more malleable behavior, as all fashion is malleable, so there is decidedly less urgency behind a crossdresser not being able to crossdress than there is behind the inability of most groups conventionally considered minorities to travel freely without fear of violence or to achieve other substantive ends that are important to them.

Aren't all these things you're saying about a cis* crossdresser applicable to a trans* person, except in the case where the cis* crossdresser would (should, in your opinion) choose to not cross dress to avoid stigma, the trans* person would (should) cross dress to avoid stigma?

I mean, a trans women can wear mens clothing when she'd prefer not to just as easily as a cis man, right?
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:30 pm UTC

All things being equal. Except the implication of a male crossdresser wearing male clothing is that they'll be treated as and referred to as a man, which they are, and which causes no real harm. Conversely, the implication of a non-passing MtF transsexual wearing male clothing is that they'll be treated as and referred to as a man, which they aren't, and which causes harm.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Panama

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Weeks » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:50 pm UTC

Brace wrote:I'm not going to feel bad for somebody because they have to regulate what kinds of clothing they wear at specific places and times.
It's not like that's part of their identity or anything, so it doesn't matter. Right?

Another hint, since you have a functional brain: you don't get to decide what is normal or not. There's also a thing called victim blaming, which someone here has been doing. Do you catch my drift?

EDIT: to clarify. I'm not commenting on whether being a trans* person and crossdressing are comparable or not. I don't think that's the issue here. However, I am commenting on personal identity, and that hate crimes against any one identity (whether you think it's a choice or not) are not "lesser" than any other.
Last edited by Weeks on Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:58 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Am I gregnant
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Quercus wrote:Agreed, but "constitutional fetishism" doesn't have that lovely alliteration between fetishism, first and fucking
rath358 wrote:I have been replaced D:

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:54 pm UTC

I'm not trying to victim blame. I'm trying to establish that there are different tiers of trouble, and also (not consequently, but in addition) that there's an awful lot I can't be bothered to care about because my own problems have more salience to me and also appear to be more significant.

My fursona is an aspect of my identity, that's why I used it as an example in a previous post. Just because something is part of your identity doesn't mean that it causes real harm not to be able to practice it everywhere.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

User avatar
Zarq
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:29 pm UTC
Location: Third Rock from Earth's Yellow Sun

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Zarq » Wed Jun 12, 2013 10:58 pm UTC

@Brace: Check your trans glasses. You're only viewing this from a trans person perspective. You're looking at the thing as if "gender identities" are the only identities that are important to properly express and be identified as. Guess what? They aren't. "Being a man and occasionally dressing up as a woman" is also an identity, and not letting people express it is also harmful.

My fursona is an aspect of my identity, that's why I used it as an example in a previous post. Just because something is part of your identity doesn't mean that it causes real harm not to be able to practice it everywhere.


Translation: I don't happen to care enough about this aspect of my identity, so no-one does.


Seriously, you are NOT the grand judge of what causes harm to people and what not.
You rang?

"It is better to shit yourself, than to die of constipation." - Some picture on reddit

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Panama

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Weeks » Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:00 pm UTC

Brace wrote:I'm not trying to victim blame. I'm trying to establish that there are different tiers of trouble, and also (not consequently, but in addition) that there's an awful lot I can't be bothered to care about because my own problems have more salience to me and also appear to be more significant.

My fursona is an aspect of my identity, that's why I used it as an example in a previous post. Just because something is part of your identity doesn't mean that it causes real harm not to be able to practice it everywhere.
That is something you've been able to define for yourself. As you have seen, a few people don't quite agree with your definition of these "tiers of trouble". I for one think one should be able to walk around anywhere in a fursona without feeling threatened.
Am I gregnant
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Quercus wrote:Agreed, but "constitutional fetishism" doesn't have that lovely alliteration between fetishism, first and fucking
rath358 wrote:I have been replaced D:

User avatar
bluebambue
An der schönen blauen Donau
Posts: 900
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 5:14 am UTC

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby bluebambue » Thu Jun 13, 2013 12:52 am UTC

Assumption: men who crossdress usually only crossdress sometimes. (I'm not sure on this as I haven't read many first hand accounts from crossdressers).

I'm going to agree with Brace that, from a utilitarian perspective and only on average, transgender women suffer more harm than crossdresses from not being able to go out in women's clothing. This is due to two calculations. The first is that if we assume for now that the harm per time period of not being in the desired clothing is the same, trans women multiply that harm by more time. The second is that, from what I understand about people who crossdress, being a crossdresser is usually a much less central element of their indentity than trans women so the harm is likely less.

However, the fact that there is less harm does not matter. The source of the problem is the same in both cases (ie overly restrictive gender roles) and the solution is the same in both (getting rid of gender roles). Thus it does no use to prioritize one over the other as their goals in this case are almost entirely the same.

This also in no way means that we should modify how we feel about victims of violence. The harm experienced because of direct violence between transgender women and crossdressers is the same. Just because crossdressers might on average experience less harm by choosing to not wear women's clothing does not mean they are in any way obligated to. Not feeling sorry for someone because of steps they might have been able to take to reduce the violence is victim blaming. You only don't feel sorry for someone when they are at least partially to blame. The blame for violence is entirely on the perpetrator.

Edit: slight rewording for clarity and expansion of my final paragraph.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7302
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Zamfir » Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:21 am UTC


Warning: from now on, you are all going to be as nice and polite as you can, or the thread gets locked.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Роберт » Thu Jun 13, 2013 3:56 pm UTC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking_Cat
Image

Some things are important to people besides just their gender identity.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Djehutynakht » Sat Jun 15, 2013 1:26 am UTC

Are any of you familiar with the old children's TV show Rugrats.


They had an awesome episode on crossdressing.

Long story short, male babies somehow get into dresses. They find them comfortable, wear them to the park. Slightly older babies try to mock them and "get them" for wearing dresses. Chase scene ensues.... then enters a bunch of rough-housing kilt-wearing Scottish babies...



I just point out these things because they are awesome examples of shows praised as "traditional" totally dealing with these issues and never having a single deal made of them.

Not a single deal.

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 1858
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Panama

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Weeks » Sat Jun 15, 2013 2:33 am UTC

Yes but this show has a protagonist as a crossdresser and that's too much! Too much, man.
Am I gregnant
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Quercus wrote:Agreed, but "constitutional fetishism" doesn't have that lovely alliteration between fetishism, first and fucking
rath358 wrote:I have been replaced D:

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:52 am UTC

Роберт wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalking_Cat
Image

Some things are important to people besides just their gender identity.


Some people are unhealthy. I don't like being compared to unhealthy people. I don't like my medical condition being treated as equivalent to the cosmetic preferences of a lunatic who killed himself. It's really not a matter of identity at all, not of expression at all. Gays don't deal with this shit, it's understood that homosexuality is an intractible attribute of being. If I were to cut your genitals off I doubt you'd think it was cosmetic.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sat Jun 15, 2013 5:24 am UTC

Brace wrote:If I were to cut your genitals off I doubt you'd think it was cosmetic.
I wouldn't.

I also wouldn't think it cosmetic if a surgeon sliced my dick in half. And yet...there are people who ask surgeons to slice their dick half!

I'm curious as to how you know exactly where to draw the line - when does it stop being identity expression, and when does it start being "lunatic cosmetic preferences"? Why do YOU have a "medical condition" while Cat Man was "unhealthy"? (Interestingly, those terms mean the same thing; it's merely their connotations that differ.)
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Sat Jun 15, 2013 11:56 am UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:I'm curious as to how you know exactly where to draw the line - when does it stop being identity expression, and when does it start being "lunatic cosmetic preferences"? Why do YOU have a "medical condition" while Cat Man was "unhealthy"? (Interestingly, those terms mean the same thing; it's merely their connotations that differ.)


Because there are piles of actual science establishing my condition as medical in nature.

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/85/5/2034
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11826131
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 6X06001462
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15724806
http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/131/12/3132
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v3 ... 068a0.html
http://cercor.oxfordjournals.org/content/18/8/1900.full
http://eje-online.org/content/155/suppl_1/S107.full

And again, the line isn't between identity expression and lunatic cosmetic preferences. Lunatic cosmetic preference is just a subjective and pejorative way of saying identity expression. What I am talking about isn't identity expression.

Princess Marzipan wrote:(Interestingly, those terms mean the same thing; it's merely their connotations that differ.)


Context is key. There is a difference between cancer and sociopathy, although they are both formally medical conditions. We treat one, and we can count on people with it to make sound treatment decisions on their own. With another, it isn't really treatable, and the disease itself undermines the authenticity and acceptability of the resulting behavior. The latter is what "unhealthy" means.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Jun 15, 2013 1:01 pm UTC

Huh? How is being trans* not in the contunuum of identity? How is a need to have your genitals switched not in the same continuum as feeling a need to have your arm cut off or your face changed to look like a cat? How is pointing to Stalking Cat's (probable) suicide indicative of anything in light of the high suicide rates among trans* people?

I agree that one extreme of these continua is indeed unhealthy. It is unhealthy to feel a need to have your (perfectly well-functioning) arm cut off. But that doesn't imply that your own surgery is on a qualitatively different continuum altogether. It just means yours is at a healthier point elsewhere on the same continuum.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Ormurinn » Sat Jun 15, 2013 1:22 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote: I agree that one extreme of these continua is indeed unhealthy. It is unhealthy to feel a need to have your (perfectly well-functioning) arm cut off.


Is there any particular reason that this is unhealthy, but wanting to have a perfectly-functioning penis cut off is not?
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Jun 15, 2013 2:07 pm UTC

Health, especially mental health, is often vague and generally socially constructed. As such, I'd say that losing an arm is the sort of thing that adversely affects your ability to go about your daily life, to the extent that if there's a way to make it so you don't feel like you need to lose an arm, that's preferable to cutting it off. A penis, on the other hand, serves only a private role and its presence or absence doesn't, in itself, have much of any effect either way on your ability to live your everyday life. I imagine, though, that most doctors would still balk at a request for simple castration without vaginoplasty, and vaginoplasty for gender correction is only undertaken after a fair amount of counseling to ensure that the patient fully understands and wants the procedure.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Ormurinn » Sat Jun 15, 2013 2:21 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Health, especially mental health, is often vague and generally socially constructed. As such, I'd say that losing an arm is the sort of thing that adversely affects your ability to go about your daily life, to the extent that if there's a way to make it so you don't feel like you need to lose an arm, that's preferable to cutting it off. A penis, on the other hand, serves only a private role and its presence or absence doesn't, in itself, have much of any effect either way on your ability to live your everyday life. I imagine, though, that most doctors would still balk at a request for simple castration without vaginoplasty, and vaginoplasty for gender correction is only undertaken after a fair amount of counseling to ensure that the patient fully understands and wants the procedure.


I completely agree.

If, however, after all that counselling, the person still wanted their arm removed, I'd say it was ok, and not necessarily unhealthy.

By way of example, some Godi have been known to remove one of their (fully functioning) eyes in order to better emulate Woden. I don't necessarily think that that's "Unhealthy" if they were in their right mind when they made the decision.
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:15 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Huh? How is being trans* not in the contunuum of identity?


Is being black, gay, or ethnically jewish an identity, or a property? Surely identity often accompanies these things but the point is that they aren't identity, there is some actual property there with its own implications (a certain amount of melanin in the skin, for example, or a definite ancestry with a related probable higher percentage of certain genes).

gmalivuk wrote:How is a need to have your genitals switched not in the same continuum as feeling a need to have your arm cut off or your face changed to look like a cat?


I don't know enough about BDD to comment on the first, for the second see above; making yourself look like a cat is only a matter of identity, SRS is a matter of medical treatment for an objective underlying condition.

gmalivuk wrote:How is pointing to Stalking Cat's (probable) suicide indicative of anything in light of the high suicide rates among trans* people?


Fair point. It doesn't really build the argument. If you accept the other points as a given then it becomes a point of pitched absurdity though.

gmalivuk wrote:I agree that one extreme of these continua is indeed unhealthy. It is unhealthy to feel a need to have your (perfectly well-functioning) arm cut off. But that doesn't imply that your own surgery is on a qualitatively different continuum altogether. It just means yours is at a healthier point elsewhere on the same continuum.


Where did this continuum concept come from and what is its justification? It seems an awful lot like a buzzword without substance designed solely to undermine the foundation for certain types of arguments without offering a more explanatory model of things.

Ormurinn wrote:
gmalivuk wrote: I agree that one extreme of these continua is indeed unhealthy. It is unhealthy to feel a need to have your (perfectly well-functioning) arm cut off.


Is there any particular reason that this is unhealthy, but wanting to have a perfectly-functioning penis cut off is not?


It isn't cut off. If that were all surgery were then there'd be infinitely more DIY.

gmalivuk wrote:I imagine, though, that most doctors would still balk at a request for simple castration without vaginoplasty, and vaginoplasty for gender correction is only undertaken after a fair amount of counseling to ensure that the patient fully understands and wants the procedure.


The term is penectomy. The notion that surgery is somehow a de-sexing is ungrounded and transphobic as hell, it's just the opposite. Post operative transwomen achieve orgasm at a fairly similar rate to cissexual women. When I referenced cutting off genitals I meant that I am currently de-sexed and surgery would be necessary to rectify that, whereas you are currently sexed and a knife could put you in the same essential situation as me. It is amazing how literally nobody is capable of taking the seconds necessary to step outside of their own myopic point of view and understand this, especially since it should be implicit from the definition of what a transsexual woman is, not to mention the broader context of the conversation.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby bigglesworth » Sat Jun 15, 2013 5:00 pm UTC

Brace wrote:I don't know enough about BDD to comment on the first, for the second see above; making yourself look like a cat is only a matter of identity, SRS is a matter of medical treatment for an objective underlying condition.
I believe BDD is a more umbrella term, but BIID (has a number of names) is what I think was being referenced above, and has been shown to involve physical changes in the brain (not unlike those involved in GID, which involve the same area of the brain) http://jnnp.bmj.com/content/early/2011/06/21/jnnp-2011-300224.abstract
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Jun 15, 2013 5:21 pm UTC

Brace wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Huh? How is being trans* not in the contunuum of identity?
Is being black, gay, or ethnically jewish an identity, or a property? Surely identity often accompanies these things but the point is that they aren't identity, there is some actual property there with its own implications (a certain amount of melanin in the skin, for example, or a definite ancestry with a related probable higher percentage of certain genes).
Those are also identities. Surely physical properties often accompany those things, such as a certain amount of melanin or a particular ancestry, but the core of an ethnicity or orientation is a matter of personal identity.

I don't know enough about BDD to comment on the first, for the second see above; making yourself look like a cat is only a matter of identity, SRS is a matter of medical treatment for an objective underlying condition.
You're still just asserting something without anything to back it up. Sure, when you assume that there's some hard difference between identifying as female and other identity issues, then it logically follows that SRS is not "only" a matter of identity. But what, actually, constitutes the "objective underlying condition", apart from identification as a different gender than one's genitals would typically suggest?

Where did this continuum concept come from and what is its justification? It seems an awful lot like a buzzword without substance designed solely to undermine the foundation for certain types of arguments without offering a more explanatory model of things.
It's a continuum in the sense that people feel their bodies ought to be different to a greater or lesser extent from how they are currently.

The term is penectomy. The notion that surgery is somehow a de-sexing is ungrounded and transphobic as hell, it's just the opposite. Post operative transwomen achieve orgasm at a fairly similar rate to cissexual women. When I referenced cutting off genitals I meant that I am currently de-sexed and surgery would be necessary to rectify that, whereas you are currently sexed and a knife could put you in the same essential situation as me. It is amazing how literally nobody is capable of taking the seconds necessary to step outside of their own myopic point of view and understand this, especially since it should be implicit from the definition of what a transsexual woman is, not to mention the broader context of the conversation.
What are you on about here? Did you object to my use of the word "castration"? Which comes from a root meaning "to cut"? Which you yourself referenced already?

None of the other stuff you're railing against in this bit is at all relevant to anything I said. I never said or suggested that SRS is de-sexing. I did not say "neuter", nor would I ever in any context involving a human who does not emself identify as neuter, for whom de-sexing would actually be the goal.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Sat Jun 15, 2013 5:24 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:
Brace wrote:I don't know enough about BDD to comment on the first, for the second see above; making yourself look like a cat is only a matter of identity, SRS is a matter of medical treatment for an objective underlying condition.
I believe BDD is a more umbrella term, but BIID (has a number of names) is what I think was being referenced above, and has been shown to involve physical changes in the brain (not unlike those involved in GID, which involve the same area of the brain) http://jnnp.bmj.com/content/early/2011/06/21/jnnp-2011-300224.abstract


"Changes" is the wrong word for GID, as the causal mechanism for the relevant brain attributes (which in this case are identical to those of cissexual females, which is an important point) isn't really understood, though evidence points to prenatal exposure to abnormally high estrogen or sensitivity to estrogen as probable causes. Probably both are causes for different individuals, and there are some additional causes which crop up with less frequency, but w/e. "Changes" assumes a deviation from a norm which is already established in the individual in question whereas it's more likely for any given individual that their brain was just always like that from the start.

Brain damage as a basis for permanent surgery seems less tenable. What if the brain repairs itself after the fact? At any rate, certainly it would be more ideal to simply repair the damage if possible. It lacks a function. With transsexuals, the relevant portion of the brain has a function, it's just the wrong function for the body in question. I think an informed consent model for BIID surgery would be acceptable as a stopgap solution for patients with extreme distress, but it is far from ideal, because it means handicapping the body in order to match a neurological handicap, so as to resolve the resulting discomfort between an unhealthy brain and a healthy body, where the ideal would be both a healthy brain and a healthy body.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Brace » Sat Jun 15, 2013 5:33 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Those are also identities. Surely physical properties often accompany those things, such as a certain amount of melanin or a particular ancestry, but the core of an ethnicity or orientation is a matter of personal identity.


I'm not talking about the core then. Now you know. If you make this mistake in further argument I will assume you are maliciously misrepresenting my argument.

You're still just asserting something without anything to back it up. Sure, when you assume that there's some hard difference between identifying as female and other identity issues, then it logically follows that SRS is not "only" a matter of identity. But what, actually, constitutes the "objective underlying condition", apart from identification as a different gender than one's genitals would typically suggest?


Why don't you try looking at all those fucking links I posted.

It's a continuum in the sense that people feel their bodies ought to be different to a greater or lesser extent from how they are currently.


How horribly contrived. Yes, I suppose that's a continuum, though I don't see how it's relevant to the decision making process, which should be based on a (potentially subjective) risk/reward assessment, or how it refutes the notion of qualitative differences between different desires for body alteration, which concern facts not addressed by this assertion at all. Besides which, if it's merely an issue of the greater or lesser, then the amputation of a gangrenous leg would count as being further along the continuum than the amputation of a perfectly healthy finger. You've introduced something completely irrelevant and senseless to the discussion in an attempt to refute an entirely unrelated series of statements. If you can't engage with a given point, don't. Don't just throw words out, scramble to find relevancy for them after the fact, and expect that to function as argument.

What are you on about here? Did you object to my use of the word "castration"? Which comes from a root meaning "to cut"? Which you yourself referenced already?


I didn't reference it. The poster you were responding to was using language like "cut their dick off". You accepted this terminology at face value and built your position from there. The formal term for cutting your dick off would be penectomy, which is also not SRS, neither of which is castration.

None of the other stuff you're railing against in this bit is at all relevant to anything I said. I never said or suggested that SRS is de-sexing. I did not say "neuter", nor would I ever in any context involving a human who does not emself identify as neuter, for whom de-sexing would actually be the goal.


You picked up the idiot ball and ran with it, so your position became entangled with the one you apparently didn't mean to represent.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

The Mighty Thesaurus
In your library, eating your students
Posts: 4399
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:47 am UTC
Location: The Daily Bugle

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby The Mighty Thesaurus » Sat Jun 15, 2013 6:19 pm UTC

Brace wrote:Why don't you try looking at all those fucking links I posted.

Your links are strangely silent on cat people. Unless this is a pun?
LE4dGOLEM wrote:your ability to tell things from things remains one of your skills.
Weeks wrote:Not only can you tell things from things, you can recognize when a thing is a thing

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Jun 15, 2013 6:39 pm UTC

The mind, which is where identity is, is in the brain, which is an electrochemical structure. So the fact that there are hormonal and neural correlates to certain identity issues is not a refutation of my central point (which is still that the difference between GID and other identity mismatches is not as clear cut as you seem to think).
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7302
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: "One Million Moms" protest new cartoon SheZow

Postby Zamfir » Sat Jun 15, 2013 8:10 pm UTC

Nothing good is going to come from this


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ivnja, Quercus and 31 guests