World Health Organization disagrees with the very basis of your claims: https://www.who.int/gender-equity-rights/understanding/gender-definition/en/ . Personally, I’m quite sure that the collection of the best medical minds on the planet, guided by the current sum total of medical and biological science, are above and beyond some rando on Derpibooru in their understanding of what gender actually is.
It’s moot debating your points in detail because they don’t have a single leg to stand on to begin with, scientifically.
Considering that by and large ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ are still synonymous, I’m not the only one that cares.
As for slave-based cultural norms, not really sure what you’re even trying to say there. Men and women don’t have to act any certain way, but men do have to have a penis, and women do have to have a vagina. Those’re body parts, not brains, and they’re not ‘fluid’ or any such other nonsense.
Never did I say they’re free in their delusions. They’re absolutely free, all the more so thanks to enabling them from mentalities like this art puts forth. No one’s happiness is a right, and being happy about being wrong isn’t right.
@Background Pony #B225
Nice to know you care more about the false purity of a language and maintaining antiquated slave-based cultural norms than you do over the happiness and personal freedoms of individuals.
Trying to change an entire language to suit one’s wishes is just simply wrong. Just because a small group of people want to misuse words, doesn’t mean the rest of the country has to join in. It’s this sort of spread of misinformation that just makes too many grey areas and breakdowns in communication.
And no, perhaps it’s not fair, but it’s still the same premise. You should not take a perfectly functional part and remove it. Nor should you purposefully sabotage your body’s natural maturing processes because of your feelings about it.
As for homosexuals, I wouldn’t entertain that either, as there’s no basis for it aside from feelings, as the rest of it. The mind can be tricked, and can overrule the body. It’s pretty obvious to anyone that m/f is the way to go.
That being said, no, they don’t need correction, just not validation either. I’m not one for any sort of conversion therapy, but neither should they be agreed with either far as I’m concerned.
@Background Pony #B225
Gender is the expression. Fortunately for society, language evolves and now gender can be used to refer to the group of societal norms traditionally associated with a physical sex. You can be safe and comfortable in the knowledge that sex still refers to the sacred XX or XY chromosome pairs and their usual physical expression as genitalia.
And as you say, “There’s just no other arena that this makes sense in”, it may be worth not trying to force it into such an arena and treating it the same way, because it is indeed different. Or are you just one step away from saying homosexuals shouldn’t have their “delusions” entertained, and instead they should be “corrected”?
Gender is not an expression. It’s what you’re sex is, male or female. You can be masculine or feminine, but that is not ‘gender’. That’s merely personality. Liking feminine things as a male or masculine things as a female doesn’t change your gender/sex.
And yes, you’re correct. There is no finite way to absolutely put everyone into a specific box, but there are overwhelmingly large norms that are better off used.
The body in most cases built itself correctly, but the mind can be confused. Easily. Like you mentioned, nurture. Single mothers raise more feminine sons, and single fathers raise more masculine daughters. Again, not exclusively, but that’s the general rule.
I don’t find it loving to tell people that are not okay, that they’re okay. The loving thing to do is help people with their issues. Get them to understand how they were made the way they are, and not build an entire ideology of alternative lifestyles and language to suit their wishes.
There’s just no other arena that this makes sense in. You don’t amputate a perfectly working limb because the person doesn’t feel they should have it. Neither are people able to claim any other demographical information to be true of themselves (race, age, etc.) So I see no good reason to make an exception here simply because people wish it to be so.
A small note, I wouldn’t quite call trans people (or lgbt as a whole) ‘deviants’ - at least not in the sense they’re people who should e punished. Perhaps because they deviate from societal norms, but it’s not typical verbage I’d use.
@Background Pony #3527
Gender is a social expression; wearing a skirt or short hair and bow tie is not a biological matter, but part of a socially imposed system of beliefs and norms.
As for biology itself, the brain and hormonal chemistry are rather complicated things, and unfortunately, or fortunately, there is no absolute “correct” that can be imposed and physically enforced on people. You can chose to make the lives of “deviants” unbearable, or you can acquiesce their trivial and inconsequential desires and just respect that maybe for reasons of birth or more complex reasons of nurture (which can impact biology and brain development), they’re different.
That’s funny though, since ‘doesn’t seem right’ is what trans peoples’ problem is anyhow. Perhaps they should listen to you too? Learn to accept the body they have rather than undergo expensive medical procedures, or dress ridiculously and wear makeup and try to ‘pass’? Being trans is a belief like any religion, intangible aside from feelings and circumstantial evidence anyhow.
It’s no one’s fault but their own that they can’t figure themselves out, and for the institutions that don’t serve them as they wish to be recognized, good on them for sticking to basic biology.
The opinion that trans people (or any person) should be able to identify as a different sex/gender (since yeah they’re the same thing, and there’s still only 2) than birth is just as bigoted as you claim mine to be, which is based on actual biological science. Obviously there’s things like Klinefelter’s, but for those rare cases it’s pretty easy to assign based on which genetic material is made down there.
That this art was made to try and help continue the wrong sort of hope for a very broken group of people, is just shameful.
But sure, moderators, continue to delete things you don’t like to read. Totally healthy practice there!
If not to try and change the minds of people who disagree, why draw art like this to begin with.
Those of us who believe trans people should have equal rights already know that, and seeing art like this doesn’t need to change our minds. People aren’t going to wake up tomorrow forgetting about trans people needing equal rights and need to be reminded of it.
Therefore I question what the purpose of the follow-up was for when you include a comment with “a bunch of people lost their shit about the first so let’s do another” as if that’s the entire justification for the second piece.
The vast majority of the complaints in the comments are not calling for discussion that is able to change minds or bring people to support the opposing view. They are about the desire to terminate such discussion in an arbitrary section of media/internet where their authors believe it should not exist.
The artist is reasserting the notion that the artist is the person to decide which themes to explore in their own artwork, which discussions to promote with it, and how frequently to do so. The fact that someone is reasserting their own position in response to criticism doesn’t make it bad faith.
Appeals to it being done to simply be “obnoxious” are a fallacy. It relies on the assumption that the artist has already agreed with the critics that they have done something wrong by creating the initial work of art, conceded their position, and created the second piece singularly out of spite, while agreeing that the initial one was wrong. Which they did not.
“If only you tried harder to find a middle ground with the people who oppose your views” is also a logical fallacy: there is no compelling reason to believe that the truth is always a middle ground between two opinions, nor that one particular side has to carry the burden to seek that middle ground by changing their thought or behavior for the sole purpose of placating the other side.
On the one hand, obviously trans people deserve every single right that anyone else has, that’s a given.
I wouldn’t care if it was an OC saying it. My issue is that “mouthpiece” tag right there, aka using canon characters to express such things.
Not to mention the fact that the description implies it was done out of spite just to get a rise out of people, and if your goal is to change minds and get more people supporting such things, upsetting the very people who may take issue with trans people is not going to improve the situation.
