Hacker News Reader

Comment by spiznnx | Hacker News Reader

My S.O. thinks that transgender thought poses a threat to feminist aims and should not be acceptable to society, and has some really good arguments. I'm starting to be convinced, but I really can't discuss it with anyone else.

edit: goodnight as its getting late.

View on HN

I'm not sure why something becomes "unacceptable to society" just because it "poses a threat to feminist aims." What's the first principles reason why it should be unacceptable?

It's not really something that can be well summarized in a hn comment, but basically, it re-enforces the idea that men and women are actually so different that you have to be a certain gender just to do something you want to do (gender essentialism).

My main point is, if it were acceptable, my s.o. would have a blog post about it that I could just link you to.

>basically, it re-enforces the idea that men and women are actually so different that you have to be a certain gender just to do something you want to do (gender essentialism)

Do you think there's a difference between thinking you have to be a woman because you want (for example) to be a nurse, and thinking you have to be a woman because you want to be a woman?

Yes, there is a difference. But you really have to think about what being a woman means, if those aspects should really be attributed as those of women, and why you want those aspects (do you really have a fundamental desire to have breasts, or do you really want to be a nurse, and feel alienated by not having them when other nurses do).

Yes, you should listen to the Gondolier episode of Radiolab. But if transgender people feel that that is true, and maybe it is true, and maybe it does weaken feminist goals... Why should the impact on feminist goals be relevant to the conversation? I.e., is society's benchmark the advancement of feminism?

Thanks for the Radiolab episode recommendation, I'll take a listen.

>Why should the impact on feminist goals be relevant to the conversation?

Because feminists are members of the society, and they hold those views for a reason. I think you already know why feminists think that feminism is good for society.

Of course, it is a valid opinion to hold that women and men are fundamentally different. The problems arise when this limits people's freedom. As a technologist I look forward to this problem disappearing. When switching genders is like switching an outfit, then all these concerns will become irrelevant :)

> As a technologist I look forward to this problem disappearing. When switching genders is like switching an outfit, then all these concerns will become irrelevant :)

You said upthread that transgender thought should be socially unacceptable, so why do you hold this view?

if it were acceptable, my s.o. would have a blog post about it that I could just link you to

Not to deny your lived experience or anything but (purely for the sake of providing a reference for discussion and not taking a position either way) TERF content is widely available on the Interwebs.

I can't find any because I don't know what TERFs call themselves (the term appears to be solely used by their detractors). Maybe my google-fu is lacking, but it seems to be hard to find. When I google things like "transgender and gender existentialism" I get only (unsatisfying) rebuttals and some poorly-thought-out complaints about trans people.

I think my s.o.'s viewpoint is a little more nuanced than "trans women aren't real women"

the term appears to be solely used by their detractors

I didn't actually know that, interesting.

Maybe my google-fu is lacking, but it seems to be hard to find

It's entirely possible that your fu is fine and this material is pushed down the index as a matter of policy.

Bigots usually wrap their hate in fancy words. It doesn't make their hate less hateful.

Jesus, that logic just broke my brain, and I'm not saying that dismissively.

Now I need to really think about this...

Is that argument really relevant? Aren't they human beings who don't chose to be transgender? So, their existence is their right. It's not a political position, or a favourite flavour of icecream, it's a human state of being.

Yes, you do have the right, but its also about how we conceptualize it as a society. People should be allowed to remove or add breasts to their body, but telling people that they did it because they felt feminine implies that feminine people should be women (and therefore that women should be feminine).

It's not just changing your body, but a redefinition of your identity to something that others were born with.

It's also a solution to something you felt needed to be solved. In the current framework of thinking, if someone feels they feel "feminine" without taking the time to really think about what that is, they might be told to consider that they are transgender. Being transgender is highly costly, associated with depression and suicide, and may make a person who feels not normal in a position where they are now even more of a minority.

I came it from your SO's side, and then went away from it. I didn't grow up around uhmm "liberals" and "liberal doctrine", so I had to figure it out for myself.

If you have more to share I'd love to hear it.

It was kind of a gradual thing. I wonder if i could really summarize right now.

I do know that atm I'm way more concerned with fighting the gender binary where it counts .. ie: cis men. "average" cis men need feel free and safe to express themselves in less "binary" ways. Until they are, it seems like the violence will never stop.

Trans folks make up such a minority and deal with a lot of shit. I don't want them to be hurt as part of somebody elses proxy war.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com