[...] I strongly support trans people, or anyone who wants to do whatever they want with their bodies for whatever reason they have[...]
I've heard this so often in this thread from the very same people that think it's completely fine to reduce trans people into a label and exclude them from the dating pool completely or believe that we can't possibly have genitals that match our gender identity. Sorry, I hope this doesn't come across as insulting but I think actions speak louder than words in this case. Declaring that you're an ally or supportive of trans people doesn't make it true, you know what I mean? I'm so done with empty platitudes of so-called allies just to have them stab my back when it's convenient or when it requires self-reflection of their behavior.
With all of this you are proving my point. Because it's clear and undeniable that you are extremely biased towards the trans perspective, and that's fine. Different perspectives are what define the human experience, and the way I see it, being pro-choice has everything to do with being biased and accepting the inherent bias of other people.
Yeah but I don't base my arguments of the fact that I'm trans, I actually make solid scientific arguments that prove my point. I don't like identity politics and I've never argued with my own personal feelings, so I'm gonna disagree with you there. I'm explicitly trying to avoid making my own identity the front and center of this debate. I care a lot about the substance, not so much about your background.
You are trans, you have a lot of trans friends and you spend time on trans echo chambers like trans-twitter judging by the "meme" you posted (twitter captures are Not memes, fight me) It's obvious that you have a different and biased perspective, but your perspective is not absolute and the people who don't share it are NOT phobic, racist or bigots.
Also, I don't actually spend time on trans-echo chambers at all. I've had so much beef with trans people and that's because we're a very diverse group with different beliefs, so you're wrong there.
We'll get back to your claim that having certain perspectives isn't -phobic, racist or bigotry in a bit.
Are people who follow their reproductive needs and want offspring inherently transphobic?
Are gay or lesbian people who prefer natural genitals transphobic?
Am I, as an asexual, the biggest phobe of all because I don't want to have relationships?
No.
Yes.
No.
It's valid to reproduce and pick a partner based on that desire but I already clarified that before.
Yes, it's transphobic to seek out "natural" genitals because that doesn't exist. It's an empty talking point, as I've explained previously - neo-vaginas have the same biological functions as a natal-vagina. Trans women can experience multiple orgasms, penetration, squirt and even self-lubricate. There is no functional difference between both vaginas.
Also, the vagina and the penis are made out of the same parts, here is a visual explanation.
The surgery simply takes those parts, for example a penis, changes size and location, and it's basically a vagina. It's not that complicated, you simply reduce the size of all those parts a lot in the case of a vaginoplasty. That's why creating a neo-vagina is much easier than creating a neo-penis because there simply isn't as much tissue available that way around. The clitoris is basically the glans, so yeah, talking about genital preferences there...
If you're asexual, that's your beer. But being asexual doesn't mean you don't enter relationships, it's more an aversion towards sexual interaction with other people, as far as I know.
There are many reasons as to why you would exclude a group of people from your dating pool, it's that simple, preference.
Alright, so if the justification never plays any role whatsoever, would you say it's okay if a white person says they don't date black people? I'm curious. I'd say the explanation as to why that might be the case would be interesting but it seems like excluding all people of color from the dating pool could never be racist, according to your post? Is it really THAT simple, Fragile? Do you REALLY believe that?
I've done more than enough and thorough research into this topic, NO, neovaginas and neopenises do not look like real ones, they function in completely different ways and not all people are into them because of that. They are an imitation, not the real ones.
Now, explain to me, what scientific evidence do you have for these claims? You said you did research, what kind of research? I've talked to doctors, to trans people, to surgeons, to a shitload of experts because I have to deal with them regularly - they all agree that a neo-vagina looks like a natal-vagina. Obviously, there is a range of good and bad outcomes of that surgery but generally speaking, a neo-vagina comes close to a natal-vagina. I've seen more than enough examples and I've read studies that observed this topic from a scientific point of view. I had partners that had a neo-vagina and I had partners that had a natal-vagina. Both worked just fine. So I'm curious, what's your scientific source here?
Why have I done so much research into this? because at some point when I was younger I felt different, and this was some rhetoric that my woke friends got me into, then after seeing the procedure, the way it fails to imitate real genitals and the amount of care that you have to take after the surgery, plus the possibility that it may cause some great harm to the nerves and other stuff, I just said "nah, I'm good and this is not the person I want to be". I grew out of it for a multitude of reasons, like many people do.
You need to elaborate, Fragile. In what ways does it fail to imitate a real genital? How many examples did you observe? How many years ago did that happen? Like, there are so many questions to ask after such a generalization. You know that there are different techniques to create a neo-vagina, which will lead to different results, right? Did you dig into this subjec, really? I don't think so. I could show you vaginas that just look like natal-vaginas, no problem - you couldn't tell them apart. I bet 100 dollars on that. Sadly, that would break the rules, not sure if showing female genitalia for "scientific purposes" would justify posting such content here.
It's true, you have to take a lot of care of the neo-vagina but trust me, any vagina requires attention. Go ask some cis-women.
And about your point about trans being difficult to tell from people of their preferred gender in the street, I have long hair, fair complexion and a slender body, people have mistaken me many times for a female even if I'm not trying to look like one. But upon a closer look they can instantly tell that I have inherent masculine features. The same goes for the vast majority of trans people, yes there are some that absolutely look the part, but with the majority you can tell, weather it's the voice, bone structure or other secondary features of their biologic gender, it's really hard to hide or change some things about our bodies.
That's also not true and it's quite brave to make such a generalization of millions of trans people, don't you think? Is that something an ally would say? "The vast majority", what does that mean, Fragile? Where do you take these numbers from? Did you conduct a scientific study to measure passing of trans people? Do all trans people fail equally in their attempt to pass? Odd, such harsh sentences so far away from the truth coming from a "supporter". Did you maybe realize that you don't notice well-passing trans people because they pass and therefore are stealth? Do these people appear in your statistics about passing trans people? Some food for thought, Fragile.
You know, I just had FFS and obviously, it's a matter of effort. There are privileged trans women that can afford surgery to erase all the masculine facial features and there are trans women that don't have that amount of money to afford these procedures. Once again, I know plenty of trans people that pass, without any big struggles. I'd love to post pictures here but that would violate their privacy rights so there isn't much I can do in that regards. Also, a person that's been transitioning for 5 years will have a much better passing than someone who just started, that's obvious. And I can tell you that trans men have no issues at all when it comes to passing. The hormones alone do a lot of work, in most cases there is no surgery needed.
Now, you said you're supporting trans rights. What's your opinion of puberty blockers?
You've mentioned brain structure in other post, I didn't wanted to get into it since this is a sensitive topic, but I can't have it no more.
The studies and information that you presented are merely evidence, not real and definitive conclusions, just the foundation of something that is still highly theoretical. As far as I know, even the multiple genders question is something that is still up to debate.
The study I've posted have been replicated a lot, that's not even controversial.
Brain activity and structure in transgender adolescents more closely resembles the typical activation patterns of their desired gender, according to new research. The findings suggest that differences in brain function may occur early in development and that brain imaging may be a useful tool...
www.sciencedaily.com
bigthink.com
Science is something that is constantly evolving, changing and broadening itself, the thing that has disproven science the most is science itself by that same process. And it's also highly susceptible to political, religious or other ideological parties putting their own bias into it.
Well, I believe in science and I base my worldview on empirical data. So if you reject scientific evidence, that's your problem, not mine.
And don't even get me started on the corrupt DSM-5 with it's economic interest and moral bankruptcy, and the academic mafia that will chase you out the moment that you stop singing praises about trans people, there is no way to prove or disprove them since some people are now treating science as a religion, which it should be the opposite of.
Do you think the academic mafia, as you call them, maybe supports trans people because there is scientific evidence that suggest that they're valid and the best way to treat them is actually confirming their gender identity and supporting their transition? I mean, you have a shitload of transphobic, anti-scientific talking points for someone who claims to be supportive, Fragile. Tell me, what exactly makes you an ally? Do you actually step in and defend the rights of trans people or do you just like to brag about being an ally on suicide forums, just like other people in this thread?
You said the genitalia of trans people doesn't look natural. You said the vast majority of trans people don't pass. None of those statements are factual and supported by evidence, it's simply an opinion based on hot air. You also said it's always okay to exclude groups of people from the dating pool, completely denying that bias or bigotry even exists.
It's just so depressing that we always have to justify and explain standing up for our rights. We're not talking about your rights, Fragile, we're talking about ours. It's always trans people that need to stand up for themselves and listen to discriminatory and degrading bullshit. And allies like you make claims like we can't have natural looking/real genitals or the majority of us don't pass, which is absolutely insulting. We don't need allies like you, Fragile. In fact, it's people like you that harm us the most because your world view isn't that much different than the world view of a transphobe. You just don't say it in such a nasty way as they do. But your talking points in your posts were absolutely disgusting. Yikes man. That certainly fuels my depression. It's that sentiment that drives so many of us into suicide ideation, by the way - just in case, you didn't notice.