If you take into account bone structure and facial recognition, he/she might be more approachable by women for having a friendlier face.
There's a lot of people out there that don't like their first names, so they go by their middle names. I don't see how calling a female-to-male transgendered person "she" or "he/she" is any different from calling someone that prefers their middle name by their first name. In both cases, you're shoehorning them into a way of identifying themselves that works fine for most people (Most people go by their first names; most people go by the gender they were biologically born as.) but does not work for them. In both cases you're being an asshole.
Thank you for calling me an asshole for not subscribing to the same set of morals that you have.
Thank you for calling me an asshole for thinking that drugs and cosmetic surgery do not make the person, the person just is.
Thank you for calling me an asshole.
Exactly. Transsexuals were born with the incorrect genitals. The drugs and cosmetic surgery do not correct their gender--just the physical expression of it.
Referring to them as the incorrect gender is no different than referring to a cisgendered person as the incorrect gender--worse, actually, because transsexuals likely struggle with identity issues and bigotry much more so than cisgendered people, and by referring to a transgendered person by the incorrect gender, you're only making that problem worse.
I offered no bigotry, but I sure received it.
As to what they would've done 100 years ago, how is that in any way relevant? This isn't "hiding" any issues--transsexuality is a medically diagnosable condition, not just a "self-identity" problem that they are "hiding from," and to imply otherwise is a huge insult to transsexuals.
You seem to think that it's in this person's best interests to refer to him using whatever gender correlates most closely with his chromosomes, but I'm not sure what makes you think you know what the best way to handle such self-identity issues is. Are you a psychologist?
It even a little uncomfortably feels like it perpetuates traditional gender/sex views, that there's something incorrect about someone with particular physical characteristics not fitting a particular gender role--- and that they need to correct it by changing their physical characteristics to match. That's certainly a choice people can legitimately make, but phrasing it as correct/incorrect comes uncomforatbly close to stigmatizing people who don't match traditional gender/sex conformance and yet don't feel that there's anything about that that needs "correcting".
(I agree in either case on calling people by whatever gender pronoun they prefer, though.)
By saying "incorrect genitals," I was simply using a shorthand for "incorrect biological gender," or a biological gender which a person does not identify with.
That sentence could be rephrased as "Transsexuals were born with the biological gender, compared to their psychological gender."
(N.B. I'm not sure if "psychological gender" is the commonly used phrase, but I think it's adequate to communicate my meaning.)
> Thank you for calling me an asshole for not agreeing with you.
I don't think disagreeing with me makes someone an asshole. I think that some actions, which may or may not stem from differing beliefs, are asshole-like. If you believe that he's still a woman, fine. But if you refuse to respect him enough to call him "he" even though that's what he considers himself and wants to be called (whether or not you agree that he's male), you're being an asshole.
Especially because being transgendered is extremely hard. In most parts of the US, it's now socially acceptable to be gay. Some people will still have hangups, you'll still face some hostility, etc. but it's not where near as bad as it used to be. Transgendered people are still basically where gay people were 40 years ago. Calling them by one pronoun when they prefer the other just adds to their feeling that society doesn't accept them.
So you're not only disrespecting their preferences, you're disrespecting a preference that's related to an issue where they've faced a lot of strife.
> Thank you for calling me an asshole for thinking that drugs and cosmetic surgery do not make the person, the person just is.
Drugs and cosmetic surgery don't make the person. But neither does the body. If someone who physically is a woman in every way and hasn't even started taking testosterone yet tells you that he is transgendered and considers himself a man, use male pronouns to refer to him as well.
Also, you have to accept that I identify as blind. Just because I am sighted doesn't mean I can't identify as blind. And deaf. Sign everything you say to me, because although I hear perfectly, I identify as deaf.
Fuck political correctness. That's for retards. Oops, did I just say retards? That's not very politically correct of me.
People can do whatever the hell they want, that's fine, but they have no right to expect me to change my behavior. They do what pleases them, I do what pleases me. Neither of us may please each other, and that should be fine. Why do you care so much?
If we were all to follow your ugly example of what 'freedom' involves, racism and prejudice would be accepted blindly. It's only those who are part of the status quo, who can be as cavalier about the subject of 'political correctness' as you are.
You're an ass.
Why? Because all of your comparisons assume that the author's reasoning is imagined and fabricated. You are totally negating something which is obviously vitally important to the author.
It's a fact that transgendered people's needs are real, and that not dealing with these needs causes a great deal of pain and disadvantage for those involved.
It's not politically correct to think this - it's simply part of being a decent human being.
And if by insisting to be referred to as a man, someone else makes themselves a pariah, that was also their choice.
Live and let live, I say, but that does not mean you should acquiesce just because someone feels their views are right (i.e., agree with you, heh, what makes your views any more right than mine, or the people who upvoted me?).
Just because something is important to someone else doesn't mean I have to give a fuck about it. For example, I am not going to be a vegan just because other people think it's bad to eat meat.
Also, calling me an ass really strengthened your argument. Kudos.
At the end of the day, we all deserve to be able to be referred to in whichever way we choose. It's about mutual respect, and I'm shocked that this kind of view is prevalent in 2010.
The base argument that you are using is the same that has been used to validate the chastisement of many minority groups .. in fact all minority groups have campaigned for the right to be referred to using terms that offer respect.
Making a 'stand' and arguing for the right to disrespect someone is far more dangerous than vulgar language will ever be - and I'd also argue that it's more disruptive than violence, as it has an effect which is longer lasting and is more likely to prevent lasting positive change.
You're not being asked to do anything other than offer respect to a fellow human being. You're certainly not being asked to change your eating habits.
No one is choosing to make themselves a pariah. In fact it's your insistence on singling out a transgendered person as 'other' which is creating outcast status.
The fact that so many people upvoted your comment, made me feel that expressing a response was all the more needed.
What you're choosing to do, is belittle someone's right to express themselves in an honest manner.
The fact that you choose to do so with so much vitriol and lack of empathy, only confirms I chose the correct term to identify you with.
But if Mr. Doe asked to be addressed as the King of France surely he would be regarded as delusional. One could still say that calling him Mr. Doe "does not work for him" but I can't see how that makes it wrong.
Now, some of us are skeptical that a person born as a man can literally become a woman, or that there are women out there who just happened to be born "trapped" inside a man's body (and vice-versa). Note that this doesn't imply bigotry of any sort.
Personally I don't care strongly about the matter. I would address the OP as "he" if I was talking directly to him. But I wouldn't feel guilty at all of speaking of her outside that.
If someone feels more aligned with a gender they weren't born with - and they feel the need to do something about it, then they deserve to be have their needs respected.