Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang > your fav i refuse to pay my taxes imagine thinking trump is the good guy is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win real madrid tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
Yes, when they are well done, and yet you still choose to focus on only one meaning and not the scientific or activist one.
The same ways we need to avoid to use racist words to avoid creating even more oppression against racialized people, we must avoid to use transphobic ones to avoid creating even more oppression against Trans people.
It's really that simple.
As I said, those words, in random usage, creates oppression.
You can use them if you want and do exist in the dictionnary yes, as every usage, but it's illegitimate since it creates oppression and it's invalidated by the scientific and activist consensus.
Your choice.
Yes, but the change of word permits to avoid the stigma.
"Gender identity disorder" implies (if you don't know what it means) that people could have a disorder just because they have a different identity. But this is extremely harmfull to trans people.
Instead, "gender disphoria" creates the picture that there is a disorder linked to the insatisfaction of the individual themselves. Thus ereasing the stigma. And the potential negative usage of the disorder.
Again, you need to understand why words have a social and political importance. You might not be impacted by this change of wording, but for Trans people it's day and night.
I'm not surprised
No. If the usage of the word hurts people it's not legitimate anymore. That's literally what I explain in the message just above.
We are ALREADY using language this way and we have been doing so for millenias mate. Some usage of language are simply not legitimate for some when they could be legitimate for others.
For example, would you use the N-Word ?
This is an simple example that usage of language can sometimes be illegitimate.
There are, but for you to understand it. You actually will need to read for once and look at something else than bad dictionnaries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity
https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/996319297/gender-identity-pronouns-expression-guide-lgbtq
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363
https://orwh.od.nih.gov/sex-gender
And since it seems to be difficult for you to understand gender identity, here is a little video targeted for children:
The same ways we need to avoid to use racist words to avoid creating even more oppression against racialized people, we must avoid to use transphobic ones to avoid creating even more oppression against Trans people.
It's really that simple.
As I said, those words, in random usage, creates oppression.
You can use them if you want and do exist in the dictionnary yes, as every usage, but it's illegitimate since it creates oppression and it's invalidated by the scientific and activist consensus.
Your choice.
Yes, but the change of word permits to avoid the stigma.
"Gender identity disorder" implies (if you don't know what it means) that people could have a disorder just because they have a different identity. But this is extremely harmfull to trans people.
Instead, "gender disphoria" creates the picture that there is a disorder linked to the insatisfaction of the individual themselves. Thus ereasing the stigma. And the potential negative usage of the disorder.
Again, you need to understand why words have a social and political importance. You might not be impacted by this change of wording, but for Trans people it's day and night.
I'm not surprised
No. If the usage of the word hurts people it's not legitimate anymore. That's literally what I explain in the message just above.
We are ALREADY using language this way and we have been doing so for millenias mate. Some usage of language are simply not legitimate for some when they could be legitimate for others.
For example, would you use the N-Word ?
This is an simple example that usage of language can sometimes be illegitimate.
There are, but for you to understand it. You actually will need to read for once and look at something else than bad dictionnaries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity
https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/996319297/gender-identity-pronouns-expression-guide-lgbtq
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363
https://orwh.od.nih.gov/sex-gender
And since it seems to be difficult for you to understand gender identity, here is a little video targeted for children:
Yes, there are indeed more interesting topic. It's not the left or even liberal who chooses to be divide on this topic :
Sadly, if we want to know very quickly on what side people are, the question of transidentity makes it VERY clear
As a gender identity, recognized by human science, yes, it can be considered as a scientific concept. Or more exactly, a scientific object of study.
You will have to prove that.
And rich, in France, are any person who have more than 3860 € per month AFTER taxes.
Sadly, if we want to know very quickly on what side people are, the question of transidentity makes it VERY clear
As a gender identity, recognized by human science, yes, it can be considered as a scientific concept. Or more exactly, a scientific object of study.
You will have to prove that.
And rich, in France, are any person who have more than 3860 € per month AFTER taxes.
Again, I think there is a missunderstanding.
I'm not talking about people who owns appartment here. "When I say that people who owns building are rich". Or even those who ows a house.
I'm talking about those who owns MULTIPLE appartments WITH the building itself and sometimes even multiple building with other appartments.
Those people don't have credits problems lol
I'm not talking about people who owns appartment here. "When I say that people who owns building are rich". Or even those who ows a house.
I'm talking about those who owns MULTIPLE appartments WITH the building itself and sometimes even multiple building with other appartments.
Those people don't have credits problems lol
Let's make one thing clear, I don't really care about what you think of me and I am not defined by your weird tests. And I don't want to speak in their stead, but I have the feeling neither does the rest of the forum. Besides this is the political thread, not the Lokigo political spectrum evaluation test.
you can repeat this as much as you like, its not hard to get at all, most people just disagree with you
And no link you shared here gives an actual working definition lmao.
Lul
Woman is not a transphobic word. Its not my or anyones fault that this term is defined by "female" and its not my fault that transwomen arent female.
And its not transphobic to say transwomen arent female. Its just what it is.
I couldnt care less about hurting the feelings of random people by using words as they are defined instead of catering to an agenda of a vocal minority
Offense is taken, not given.
And no link you shared here gives an actual working definition lmao.
Post automatically merged:
Lul
Post automatically merged:
Woman is not a transphobic word. Its not my or anyones fault that this term is defined by "female" and its not my fault that transwomen arent female.
And its not transphobic to say transwomen arent female. Its just what it is.
Post automatically merged:
I couldnt care less about hurting the feelings of random people by using words as they are defined instead of catering to an agenda of a vocal minority
Offense is taken, not given.
Like I said, it's the case here.
You can either accept it or refuse it and use the oppressive definitions of those words, it's your choice.
Well, you can run from it if you want.
Transidentity is THE biggest difference and point of contention (at the moment) between conservatives ( republicans/far rightist/ conservatist capitalist and liberatarian) and progressists (liberals/leftist/radical leftist)
This method was proven definitely reliable for me hehe
Yes, those links are clear, and the definition are VERY CLEAR and working. You just refuse to accept them. Which makes your point of view slighly [Search Your Label Here]. But this is not surprising. You have been defensive against a progressive agenda for the legitimity of transidentity since the beginning.
You can "lul" all you want. mate, you are still refusing to accept scientific consensus.
You can either accept it or refuse it and use the oppressive definitions of those words, it's your choice.
Well, you can run from it if you want.
Transidentity is THE biggest difference and point of contention (at the moment) between conservatives ( republicans/far rightist/ conservatist capitalist and liberatarian) and progressists (liberals/leftist/radical leftist)
This method was proven definitely reliable for me hehe
Yes, those links are clear, and the definition are VERY CLEAR and working. You just refuse to accept them. Which makes your point of view slighly [Search Your Label Here]. But this is not surprising. You have been defensive against a progressive agenda for the legitimity of transidentity since the beginning.
You can "lul" all you want. mate, you are still refusing to accept scientific consensus.
Technically, I'm not talking about the word, but USAGE of the word. In other words, what is problematic and therefore oppressive for transpeople is to say that "Woman or sex describes the sex" of the individual just as much as "female". And that "Transwomen are biological men"
Yes I noticed, then don't be surprised when I'm trying to counter you.
This says a lot about you.
And this proves once again what I said here:
>>
Yes I noticed, then don't be surprised when I'm trying to counter you.
This says a lot about you.
And this proves once again what I said here:
>>