That right Kizzy you tell him

You also quoted me and mentioned Niamh.. As you pointed out there is enough prejudice on this forum already without your unnecessary accusatory comments.

:clap1: :clap1: :clap1:

Yes you are!

Well then stop putting people in groups, and start treating people as individuals, and treat each case on their own merit.

This is serious debates, kids, go to bed.

A nonsense post. He isn't putting people into groups, he's talking about comments targeted towards people who share a common trait. Whether that be of a certain colour, gender, race, religion, sexuality etc.

That's not grouping people. If a comment ridicules black people for example, then it's disparaging to everyone who is black not just an individual.

Please don't disagree with me, my feelings are hurt when you do that, you're committing a hate crime by hurting my feelings, I feel like you're ridiculing me by not agreeing with me.

I'm only kidding, I ain't a con man.

...so this escalated quickly and with a very ‘dark’ tone...let me re-read because I don’t understand, TS...(..and that’s quite unusual because you’re someone who expresses things very well..)...but I’m struggling a bit with this, with what you’re saying...

..but how is Kizzy being ‘self important’...when her post was specifically quoted as ‘exhibit A’, to highlight your thoughts...to respond to that isn’t being ‘self-important’...you said that you explicitly stated that another member ‘was the worst’...but it wasn’t that member’s post or posts if you feel there were multiples...that you gave as ‘an example’ of your concerns..

...’I am perfectly willing to agree that it’s open for reasonable, considered debate..that my main concern is consistency’...apologies, I struggle to bold with this device, TS...but I really am confused..because you’ve said Vicky is ‘the worst’...but that this topic is open for considered debate...yet you’ve interacted with Vicky in the thread so far as I can see...and didn’t express any concerns you’ve just stated...in your interactions, if concerns were being felt...was that not the perfect opportunity and opening for reasonable and considered debate...but you didn’t pursue it with that opening..?...and if you feel that Vicky ‘is the worst’...then surely there’s consistency...because if there wasn’t consistency then a ‘worst’ couldn’t be felt..?....

...I don’t feel there is mocking about ‘blokes pretending to be women’...quite clear anger, yes I would agree...but (...from my perspective of any recently related thread../..topic..)...that anger, or fear I should maybe say...has been quite specific of possible vulnerabilities ...the fear of creating an opening if someone was able to ‘identify as’...with ‘self-declaration’...when there has been no transitioning..?...hmmm, I may not agree with Vicky in all areas, but her concerns are understandable and very valid also...so surely expressing those concerns can’t be deemed in any way as ‘phobic’....otherwise we all silence ourselves..:laugh:...and surely there have been some debates in parliament when discussing legislations on ‘self-declaration’...because others have the same concerns as Vicky....and progression would never be a possibility if these concerns were not expressed and discussed...but you haven’t discussed them though TS, you’ve condemned them ....which is confusing....

I accept this is your view, so I see no argument there. But as far I'm aware, there are no protected "groups" on TiBB. Most stuff that I've seen deleted (and a lot doesn't...), it's caustic or problematic commentary meant to cause a row or derail a thread. Unless certain opinions are being policed... in which case, that is simply wrong.


On topic, with regards to transgender vitriol, in my own opinion it's something that does fly under the radar quite easily, but I don't immediately connect this with anger or hate against transgender folk (depends on the person or their commentary). I tend to think it's because many folk still view transgenderism in general as a mental illness and mockery and caustic language (prejudicial treatment) towards mental illness has always been accepted criticism of someone in our society. It's OK to call someone a looney, a bunny boiler, a pathetic drug addict, etc, if their behavior is deemed to be down to some sort of personal defect, especially if it is mental or emotional. This isn't handled particularly well in the media either and it is certainly not handled all that well sometimes even in SD. So it's no surprise that transgenderism has been affected by this stigma since it currently is casting a big shadow over the grey area that lies between mental illness or actual cultural phenomenon in present popular discourse... Some mental illnesses also occupy these grey areas.

For example, when we are talking about what is "wrong" with someone, it's generally considered acceptable discourse to include mental impairments as a way to screen their behavior for other moral or personal defects related to their personhood... for example, Donald Trump and the case for him having NPD... while the media does generally cover what he is doing, they're more often obsessively focused on his more tedious behavior(s) and treating him like a monkey in a cage in need a rubber room.. and though there is validity to connecting his behavior and outbursts with NPD (there is a strong case there I think), they actively search for his mental impairments in order to make other cases for classifying his behavior as signs of serious mental impairment.. when no one, including psychologists breaking their ethics to speak on his mental state, are in any position to even diagnose or treat him. That's an uncomfortable line being crossed for me and is being crossed more and more each day the more we bring social media into the mainstream. The more silly stuff that gets said, the more the media can dig up in other people's timelines in order to play out some cynical fantasy about other people's supposed deviant behavior.

We kind of saw some of this same "fair play" with the Aspergers discussion. Except it was used in such a way to somehow make light of fairly insensitive commentary. It doesn't matter what their mental illness is, imo, if their behavior is terrible, then it is what that is... and just the same, if someone is suffering from dysphoria and acts like a general fool on public television (India), then those same variables can't then be summoned at will as a convenient shield at very particular times to protect themselves from criticism. They have a condition or a dysphoria, but that doesn't make the entirity of their personhood. They aren't bestowed additional virtues for having been identified as such. And when we add these additional markers to make a picture of how these people should be seen on basis of labels alone, we actually further stigmatize others who doesn't necessarily share those characteristics under the same umbrella.. which I think does make it much easier for some folk to cast a general blanket over certain disorders in order to validate their own shared experiences... because some sections think by placing these things on a pedestal, we "destigmatize" it. Like the concept of intersectionality, it actually makes it more difficult for those under certain labels to get out from behind them... it doesn't not just lessen the stigmatization, but it maybe even burdens them with uneasy expectations... especially for those who are still struggling and aren't coping well with even any stigma.

This is why when my grandfather lies or says he can't hear us when we're asking him very specific questions, we don't let him use his Schizophrenia or his Senioritis as an excuse to avoid ducking responsibility for his own behavior. Those are conditions that he lives with, but those conditions are not all that we see in him. And people who have had to deal with someone who is prone to this type of dodging, though it may seem harsh, that's sometimes what we have to do to get someone to not only be accountable for their own livelihood but also to get out from behind their labels so that we can see all of who they are... and not just simply treat them as a burden or disruptive element to society.

...I don’t always agree with Vicky on ‘transsexual topics’ but I do understand her concerns and fears...and her concerns and fears are quite consistent, I feel...there is no inconsistency in them...many seem to come from personal experiences which sadly have been quite negative...which makes them more understandable...so something which is good to express and create openings for discussion...Niamh also understands her concerns and fears, I feel...so is very open to discussion also....


...just specific to the topic and Paris Lees...I’ve just googled her because I wasn’t familiar with her ‘story’...

While in prison Lees decided to change: "I just thought, 'I'm this silly teenage boy in a prison cell who has made a huge mistake and I want to be this happy person'

...so she identified herself as a ‘boy’ with that statement...(..there may be many other statements also, I don’t know..)...but she’s relating aspects of her life...which is basically what Anne did in the ‘debate’ on The Wright Show...saying ‘you where a boy’, so you have understanding of ‘boys clubs’...Paris would have understandings in some aspects of her life from the perspective of ‘male’, which was what Anne was inferring...and Paris is relating one of those very perspectives of her time in prison..?...

...it’s often said about ‘male priveledge’...and I do struggle a bit with that I have to say....just because I don’t feel anyone who has felt ‘incorrectly gendered’ through their lives...would never have felt a sense of ‘priveledge’ to be their society recognised gender through that time in their lives...to be priveledged, you would have to ‘feel’ that priveledge...and to me...that would feel impossible..so the comparisons can’t be made or are hard to be made in the same way with males who do feel completely correctly gendered....because that person has never felt any ‘priveledge’...all they’ve felt is unhappiness and a sense of ‘not fitting’ ...obviously this is just male to female specifically because of the topic of discussion being Anne and Paris...but I do also feel it’s relevant in many discussions to discuss a ‘whole story’ of someone’s life because of the individuality of life stories ..and how specifics have relevance’s to experiences which form opinions and stances etc...as Paris herself has obviously spoken about her specific experiences...obviously how Anne addressed it, didn’t lend to any ‘discussion’ or debate, in her directness and tactlessness...but because if her own ‘story’ of her Aspergers, it’s difficult to say whether her comment was ‘deliberate’ and intended to ‘shut down’....which makes for the interest of this news story also...

imo the difference between gender and sex is one is biology and the other is a bunch of stereotypes

I think that's extremely unfair tbqh TS and I'm pretty surprised to hear this coming from you especially. Vicky has put her concerns about the subject across in a very well thought out and well read manner, I would say she's probably one of the most open to listening posters in SDs. Just because you don't agree with her POV on this particular subject doesn't mean that her opinions are invalid or phobic, I haven't heard her say something like "oh bloke in a dress lololol" her opinions come from actual concerns for women, whether you agree with that or not

Says one of the biggest kids on here. And you have the nerve to call me a hypocrite. Go away.

Well yeh, and thats the issue. You're ignoring neural connective patterns, white matter, gray matter, testosterone, estrogen, oxytocin and hippocampus size.. which naturally created the stereotypes you speak of. There's reasons that women and transwomen tend to be more verbal and why men and transmen tend to have poorer memory. The brains are literally different.

Assuming trans people are that way because they fit a stereotype is absurd honestly. Your gender is always in your brain, some people with penis' have a brain more akin to a woman, but some will be midway between, and some would resemble the brain of neither sex. Its just a thing that has always happened, and will always happen.

Nobody is trans just because they like make-up and used to play with dolls. Its the assumption that they are which is transphobic.

I think it obvious many women share vicky’s concerns on this as the reactions of many women over issues such as non-transitioned men using women’s bathrooms, has highlighted.

But TS is not a woman so I question why he thinks he has the right to not only question such concerns that would not affect him personally - but to attach labels to women who have them. The potential risks to women, not men, are obvious.

I'm not ignoring anything, I just disagree with you. You give an example there of women being more verbal than men, that's a stereotype. I'm not verbal at all irl, Gav is very verbal, does that mean I'm a man and he's a woman? no of course not. Biology and life experience of being treated as a woman because of that biology is what makes a woman a woman and a man a man imo.

also if you look up the definition of gender it pretty much says "a bunch of stereotypes"


the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones):

"traditional concepts of gender"


•the members of one or other sex:

"differences between the genders are encouraged from an early age"


synonyms: gender

Of course there are exclusions. There are hundreds of differences, that is one of the main ones. Women and transwomen tend to be more verbal than men and transmen on average, because women and transwomen have verbal hemispheres on both sides of the brain, and men and transmen do not. That is not to say that every woman and transwoman uses it very often, but it is there. It exists.
Ie: Gav uses the little he does have excellently, and you use yours less despite having more scattered around your brain (assuming youre both cis).
You can disagree with this undeniable difference if you want, but your refusal to acknowledge these differences are literally scaffolding your less-than-positive reviews of transpeople, and thats a shame.

that word "cis" annoys me too.

I'm pretty sure the whole brain debate is inconclusive actually, you've just chosen to believe the studies that support your POV

They're not at all inconclusive, they're extremely visibile on fmri scans. Several differences between male and female brains have been recorded, thats just a thing thats 100% guaranteed.

Soz for annoying you with the word cis.

They actually are

https://www.newscientist.com/article...-female-brain/

I'm not playing swap the link with you

Yours doesnt really disprove or prove much

I can agree with that - more of a scale than two statutory points. Surely you can see why a person born a man would want to be a transwoman if their brain was more of a heavier mix of a female brain?

How thats not just a bunch of stereotypes like you assumed an hour ago?

I'm sorry I don't really understand what you're asking here? (and again I'm not sure what you mean by "female brain"

Well, did you read the link you sent me. It defines the idea of male and female features of the brain, but how there arent two definitive brains, everyones brain is on a binary scale from extremely masculine to extremely feminine with everybody in between the two points.

If a person was born with a penis had more feminine features to their brain, you can see why they would sooner identify as a woman?

How thats not stereotypes like you assumed, their brain is literally structured in a feminine way.

That is what trans is? Brain differences, not stereotypes?

No I can't see that at all because if that were the case I'd be identifying as a man myself but again I don't define my gender by stereotypes, I define it by biology and life experiences because of that biology.

I dont understand why you keep bringing up stereotypes though. I've never brought that up, your link never brought that up - as far as I can tell, thats just your misconception of what gender is.

I posted the definition of gender a few posts up and it pretty much says a bunch of stereotypes, doesn't mention the word brain once but OK I'm the one who doesn't understand gender

Doesnt really say that though? Its an incredibly simplistic 10-word definition which you interpreted in an odd way.

Theres nothing I disagree with in the definition. There are social and cultural differences between gender, gender is encouraged from an early age. You're just ignoring why this has happened.

You know it's possible to have this discussion without having little digs at me Withano. I don't think it's "odd" to interpret the Bits I've bolded to mean stereotypes

the state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones):

"traditional concepts of gender"


•the members of one or other sex:

"differences between the genders are encouraged from an early age"


synonyms: gender
Today 09:25 AM

I'm not ignoring why this has happened, I disagree with your view of why it happened

Well I'm saying it has happened because of brain differences. You shared a link highligting these brain differences. Are you now disagreeing with the link you shared?

The problem with a lot of this stuff is semantics and I think it's largely down to a lot of the wording we use coming about before we really understood much about transsexualism. I think there's truth in what both you and Withano are saying tbh. The current definition of gender only changed to what it is now as a way of describing certain stereotypes, however it's use for a lot of issues relating to trans people is very different, so ideally when we use terms like 'gender identity' for example, a different/new term should be used imo, or the definition of gender should be changed again. The problem is that when it was coined we didn't have the same understanding we have now and it creates so much confusion in all of this!
But like Withano says, when a trans person says they feel they are a different gender to what their biological sex is, they aren't referring to stereotypes at all (confusion comes again because they'll often describe the conforming of gender stereotypes as a way that helps their gender dysphoria - not because 'dressing like a woman' is innate, but because it helps society treat them as a woman and therefore alleviates their dysphoria.) But the dysphoria itself comes from the reality of their biological sex being different to the sex they feel they are, which doesn't actually have anything to do with stereotypes.

I think a similar thing goes for the word 'cis', it annoys a lot of people I've noticed but it doesn't actually mean anything that defines you or changes how you'd be viewed or anything. It's just useful in conversation like this to separate who's being talked about, a trans person or a non trans person, which is a distinction that sometimes needs to be made (and gets made also by people who seem to have a problem with the term but just worded differently). But in actual fact it doesn't mean anything different to saying 'non-trans person', ' someone who isn't trans' etc etc, it's not applying a label it's just used to make the conversations easier to understand. Again, it's just semantics.

The link I posted says there is no male or female brains, they specifically have the "male" and "female" in "'s because of that

“There are not two types of brain”

When the group looked at each individual brain scan, however, they found that very few people had all of the brain features they might be expected to have, based on their sex. Across the sample, between 0 and 8 per cent of people had “all-male” or “all-female” brains, depending on the definition. “Most people are in the middle,” says Joel.

This means that, averaged across many people, sex differences in brain structure do exist, but an individual brain is likely to be just that: individual, with a mix of features. “There are not two types of brain,” says Joel.

Make TiBB Gay Again :dazzler:

I've been through this, I feel like you're just skirting around the question by ignoring what I'm saying

The link you shared highlights how there is a more typically masculine brain, and a more typically female brain, with nearly everybody falling between the two on a binary scale.

You're saying transpeople feel that way because of stereotypes, when this link would clearly imply that a transperson would actually just have a brain which is structured in a more feminine or masculine way, which does not correlate with their birth-sex.

Women and transwomen will have, on average, a more feminine brain
Men and transmen will have, on average, a more masculine brain
This has created stereotypes like women having a better verbal ability because they are, on average, better at verbal reasoning due to their brain structure.

Which part of you disagreeing with?

I take your points Jamie but I guess I just don't understand how a person born in one sex can feel like an other when I whole heartedly believe that feeling like a woman comes directly from sex and how your life experiences go because of being that sex. I feel like I'm just repeating what I've already said now though but I guess that's just what I think about it. It's always a pleasure reading your views though, you put your points across very well