Social Justice Transgender and gender identity discussion

[cduggles]

My cat is definitely Trans

I’m probably going to regret asking this, but how so?

hermaphrodite plant

My fetal pig in biology was a hermaphroditie. I named it Hermie. My teacher was not amused.

edit: interesting article about animals and biological sex, including gyandromorphs, which are both half female and male (they aren’t considered hermaphrodites).

Animalogic

Animalogic is a cross-platform digital brand that explores everything that is wacky and wonderful about the animal kingdom.

animalogic.ca

 

[birdup.snaildown]

Elliott Page IS a man.

I disagree.

That's the reality.

"The" reality?

I don't think it is transphobic to say that Elliot Page is a woman. Using slurs is transphobic, but it gets complicated when you are forcing people to believe something they don't believe in order to not be a bigot.

But if I personally introduced you to Elliott Page, or he introduced himself to you somewhere, as “Elliot” would you insist on referring to him to his face as Ellen?

Would you be gritting your teeth and burning with seething anger?

Often when I meet people who know of me, they ask “do you prefer Chris or Chrostopher”.

Anybody who kept up with Chris after I expressed my preference for Christopher is just rude aren’t they?

What’s the diff?

I’d go with Elliott every time. But it’s not making me think transx are real x.

I don't think it's helpful to reinforce people's delusions in order to not offend them. That is not my style. I like to say it how it is... I would use male pronouns, I guess. There's no anger. It's just a little frustrating that I'm being forced to contribute to someone's mental illness. It's comes more from a selfish place though, honestly. I don't want someone to dictate what I can and can't say.

There is a HUGE difference between saying something racist to a Black person and refusing to use male pronouns when talking to someone that looks and sounds like (and is) a woman.

you are the one who is denying reality

Here's this objective reality again.

chromosomal configurations apart, my understanding is that the more research is done on transgender people, the more they are found to be, at a biological level, the gender they have transitioned to rather than that assigned at birth.

can you provide a realistic scenario in which accepting transgender people actually harms society at large, as you claim?

The transgender movement is the most frightening aspect of far-left PC culture dictating what people are allowed to say and do.

At the end of the day, nobody (aside from a select few) actually think trans women are women. A lot of the people on the pro-trans side of the argument - which is the clear minority - believe that trans women are not women, but trans women... but, we're supposed to treat them like they're women?

I don't think it's helpful to people to lie to them.

A lot of trans people are frustrated because they are being sold this lie that they are women when in fact they are not. Straight men don't want to date them or marry them because they have penises.

the more they are found to be, at a biological level, the gender they have transitioned to rather than that assigned at birth

Are their penises biologically female?

 

[cduggles]

My yellow cat Sunshine is a female, most yellow cats like Garfield, are born male for some reason.

Oh, I knew that about tortoiseshells (female), but not calicos or yellow cats.

It’s weird behavior for a female cat, so I’m pretty sure she identifies as a male.

I would be interested to hear what a vet had to say if they mention anything. Thanks for the interesting reply.

It’s a good point that you bring the plant and animal kingdoms into this debate about sex/gender. We are, after all, animals, and looking outside of our own species can offer insight.

 

[Xorkoth]

Sorry, but NO.

Ellen page won film awards as a woman for being an actress.

Just because she decided be a man, doesn't erase history.

She was born a woman, worked as a woman, and now she wants to be a boy. Whatever. But you can't go back in time and say that Elliot Page won Actor awards for the film Juno, because that didn't happen, as she was a woman who was awarded actress awards and people who were men were given actor awards. These are facts.

Why do you care so much what he or she wants to be called and how he or she views him or herself? It's their business, not yours, isn't it?

 

[Jabberwocky]

I disagree.

As is your right. And it also helps keep conversation rolling along. So that’s good.

I don't think it is transphobic to say that Elliot Page is a woman. Using slurs is transphobic, but it gets complicated when you are forcing people to believe something they don't believe in order to not be a bigot.

The issue here might be that language is fluid and, as semioticians have been telling us for years, there is no necessary connection between a word (a sign) and what it signifies. It may well be that the pace of change in language relating to trans people is too fast for your liking. It may also well be that you do not like the element of organisation and activism influencing that change. But it is not without precedent. The meaning of ‘gay’ changed partly through deliberate action. So too, did the meaning of ‘nigger’. The meaning of hundreds of other words has changed across time . Words like ‘awful’, ‘cute’, ‘fantastic’, ‘flirt, ‘literally’, ‘awesome’ all would be unrecognisable in current usage to English speakers from the past.

What is happening is that the etymology of ‘man’ and ‘woman’ is in a state of flux and there is no longer or not yet any word (besides the clunky cis-man and cis-woman) that matches the concept of man and woman in your head. The semantic content of ‘man’ has expanded to include certain persons who have, or had, vaginas and XX chromosomes. That genie is never going back in the bottle. However, I find it easy to accept that the meaning of man has changed without accepting that transwomen/‘cis-women’ or transmen/‘ cis-men’ are ontologically identical.

What frustrates me is that I don’t have a better word than cis-x to describe my concept for what formerly meant ‘men’ and ‘women’ to me. But I speak other languages so I have experience in seeing that mental concepts do not correlate to specific words in a conclusive way.

Basically you are kicking against the pricks on this. Which has been a recipe for frustration and disapointment that even the Greeks warned against.

I don't think it's helpful to reinforce people's delusions in order to not offend them. That is not my style. I like to say it how it is... I would use male pronouns, I guess. There's no anger. It's just a little frustrating that I'm being forced to contribute to someone's mental illness. It's comes more from a selfish place though, honestly. I don't want someone to dictate what I can and can't say.

I think you are on dangerous ground with the mental illness argument. Normal/abnormal or normal/deviant are socially constructed categories. The fact that they have varied so much through time is evidence of this. Consider Asperger’s Syndrome, which in it’s extreme manifestations was treated as a form of insanity (or idiocy or retardedness in the parlance of the time). We now recognise the concept of neurodiversity and understand that while socially problematic sometimes, people with Asperger’s deserve opportunities to participate fully in society with some degree of compromise on the part of society. We do the same even for Downs Syndrome. Similar developments can be seen with all kinds of mental illness which are increasingly accepted and normalised within society, especially in workplaces. Compromise and accomodation seems to be the way of the culture regarding people who are mentally different from the norm.

A decade ago (maybe more, but not by much) pejorative language against people was common in all of the categories mentioned in the previous paragraph. Social pressure has denied us many ways to discuss / refer towards such people. You cannot, call a person suffering from bi-polar disorder ‘insane’ in the workplace if they become manic any longer. But you don’t seem as animated about these kinds of language changes? There is something specific about the gender one that agitates you? If that is the degree of activist organisation I could understand it. But mental health advocates have been pretty active in seeking changes to language for other conditions/situations in the past.

Also, in the treatment of a psychosis my understanding is that Psychiatrists do not immediately confront or attack the delusion. They invest quite a lot of time understanding the delusion and will often leave it be if it is not particularly harmful to the individual or anybody else. It is often viewed as more harmful, in the short term, to call out a deluded person’s psychosis than it is to go along with it.

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

Why do you care so much what he or she wants to be called and how he or she views him or herself? It's their business, not yours, isn't it?

That's what im saying....

why does anybody really care? it doesn't even affect you really, does it?

why would you insist on calling somebody the genitalia that they were born with when they'd prefer not to be called that? how do you know where their head is at? isn't that what it's really all about anyway? and to sit here and argue about it like "i'll call them whatever i want"... you think that's cool? i mean how rural are you living?


and it's true, most orange/yellow tabby cats are male - it's the chromosome from the male that actually makes them that color - or something like that anyway....i think that's far out man

 

[birdup.snaildown]

That genie is never going back in the bottle.

I'm not convinced of that. The world at large is yet to embrace the transgender movement. The majority of the population within countries that have embraced it are not on board either.

Slurs like nigger have no relevance to this particular situation, as far as I'm concerned. I'm not suggesting that people should us slurs against trans people.

There is a difference between telling people what not to say and forcing them to say something they don't want to. The former I can tolerate. The latter frustrates me.

As for mental illness, I'm not saying trans people are crazy. I have suffered from mental illness and I'm not crazy either.

I work with people who have ASD and down syndrome. I don't see how these conditions are relevant here?

But let's take autism/asperger's. The world doesn't change to reflect their condition. Like I said there's a difference between telling people what not to say/do and telling them what to say/do.

If people don't think trans women are women, they shouldn't have to pretend. I'm NOT saying they should be allowed to yell slurs or commit acts of violence.

You said this situation isn't unprecedented. Can you name a more sensible parallel?

When in history has the Canadian government dictated what people must say - not what they must not say?

This situation is different than other hate crimes, because it isn't hateful to express this particular opinion. It's hateful to say hateful things. Saying a man is a man is not hateful. It is, however, hateful to hate people who don't conform to the dictates of transgenderism.

What you said about man being replaced with cis man is interesting. Shouldn't we call trans men trans men rather than calling trans men men and calling men cis men? Or is nobody a man anymore? Are there now only trans men and cis men?

I'm not a cis man. I'm a man.

 

[Jabberwocky]

@birdup.snaildown

On the question of should language be legislated. Generally not, however in order for legislation to be effective its terms must be clearly defined. The legal meaning of dozens of terms is legislated, and legislated meanings tend to seep into common usage.

So, if the government intended that all the legislated benefits enjoyed by cis-women should also be enjoyed by trans-women, it may be simpler legislatively to pass one bill saying trans-women are legally women than to amend every single other piece of legislation that contains the word ‘woman’.

I am unclear on whether you believe that transwoman are delusional or mentally ill. Your earlier post seems to suggest you do think that (on which case I stand by my argument about the social construction and contingency of what is mentally normal and what is not. However, your more recent post suggests you don’t think that?

Also, do you disagree with my argument that language is fluid and dynamic and that over time meanings of words change? If you do accept that, why do you not accept that such a process is occurring with historically gender-nominating words like man and woman.

Furthermore the same words have different meanings in different contexts. The referand for ‘man’ can be related to sex (which is biological) but it can also be related to gender (which is at least partially socially constructed and performative). I think its important to be clear where the issue lies. For me I have no trouble in including transwomen in the caregory ‘woman (gender)’ but huge and probably insurmountable problems with including them in woman (sex).

Can you split the two concepts and deal with then seperarately?

 

[birdup.snaildown]

I am unclear on whether you believe that transwoman are delusional or mentally ill.

I hesitate to say my true feelings about trans people because I don't want to offend people and I don't want to lose friends. If you are clinically female in every way, it is delusional to perceive yourself as male. They used to call it gender dysphoria and it was listed in the DSM-5.

If you're skinny and you think you're fat, that's body dysmorphia. I don't really differentiate between gender dysmorphia and body dysmorphia, in terms of which one is more/less delusional. I am not even slightly convinced that being a man in a woman's body (or vice versa) is really a thing.

Mental illness is not craziness. I don't like the term crazy. It's not a helpful term. If there's an illness, we can understand it and treat it. Calling someone crazy is a way of writing them off. I also don't believe in the word evil, for the same reasons.

Depression is a form of mental illness. Statistically people who are trans are way more likely to experience depression and many other forms of mental illness. The counter argument is (typically) to blame cis people and systemic transphobia, in the same way that we - as a society - tend to blame white people for issues experienced by minority groups.

I tend towards the belief that people like Ellen Page are confused.

50 year ago, cutting off your breasts and calling yourself a man would have been universally perceived as "crazy". Like I said, I don't like that word. It is a word people use when they fail to understand the underlying issues of particular mental illnesses. I'm not saying I understand the core of psychosis or bipolar or gender dysmorphia, but I assume there is a core.

Admittedly, some of my attitude towards the transgender movement is influenced by religion. I wasn't raised Christian, but I like Christianity. I think man/woman is perfect. I don't believe people need to change gender. I think materialism is a dead end. I think capitalism is a dead end. People have unhealthy addictions to film and television. This (all of it) is a sickness. Part of that sickness is the transgender movement.

If I deconstruct gender, I end up with this statement: gender is meaningless. Therefore, it makes no sense to me to change gender. Instead, people should renounce gender and be free from it.

Wearing a dress isn't inherently female. Just look at the Scots. Wearing make-up isn't inherently female either. Look at 18th century France.

When David Bowie wore a dress, that was part of a movement to break down gender barriers. Men and women should be able to wear whatever they want; clothes are irrelevant.

I've thought about this stuff a lot. If you take out all the superficial stuff like clothing and socially dictated behaviours, you aren't left with a lot at the core.

What does it mean to be male?
What does it mean to be female?
These are valid questions.
They should be explored.

On the question of should language be legislated. Generally not, however in order for legislation to be effective its terms must be clearly defined. The legal meaning of dozens of terms is legislated, and legislated meanings tend to seep into common usage.

I take it you cannot give me an example of legislated speech that is dictated? When (in the modern Western world) have people been forced to say something that they don't believe? Where is the precedent you mentioned?

I'm not suggesting it hasn't happened, but it tends to occur in unfavourable situations like dictatorships.

So, if the government intended that all the legislated benefits enjoyed by cis-women should also be enjoyed by trans-women, it may be simpler legislatively to pass one bill saying trans-women are legally women than to amend every single other piece of legislation that contains the word ‘woman’.

Whether or not it is simpler to treat trans women as women, legally, is a different argument. I'm not convinced that it will save enough time/money to justify blurring the legal definition of a woman... but perhaps (ideally / theoretically) we should take gender out of law and treat everyone as people?

None of that has any bearing on whether or not people should be pressured into saying something that they don't want to say.

There is freedom of speech, which must be limited to some extent.
Then, there is the freedom to not speak which is unlimited.

Also, do you disagree with my argument that language is fluid and dynamic and that over time meanings of words change?

I agree that language is fluid.

If you do accept that, why do you not accept that such a process is occurring with historically gender-nominating words like man and woman.

As I said, it's not really occurring beyond a small group of people. Most countries in the world aren't changing the definition of man and woman. I've met very few people who want to change the definitions.

Man/woman - these words aren't interchangeable with spastic or nigger. They are words that have existed since the beginning of language and they represent things that exist in the world. As you said, the definitions (according to the trans community) are becoming muddied already.

Is a trans man a man?
Most people say no, but you can't say they're not men.

So, now we have cis-man and trans-man, both of whom are men.
This is bad mathematics.

The referand for ‘man’ can be related to sex (which is biological) but it can also be related to gender (which is at least partially socially constructed and performative).

One of the big problems with the separation of sex and gender is the selectivity involved when people separate them for political purposes.

I still don't understand the difference.

You said gender is "at least partially socially constructed".
Surely it is entirely socially constructed?

They way gender is defined changes according to culture/country. Like I said earlier, if you deconstruct gender and break down all the superficial shit... what are you left with?

Gender doesn't exist. It is meaningless. There is only sex.

If gender isn't sex, then why do trans people have surgery?

Can you split the two concepts and deal with then seperarately?

A progressive attitude towards gender, in my mind, involves discarding gender stereotypes. Men and women can be doctors. Men and women can go to war. Men can wear dresses. Women can wear pants.

Ellen Page isn't more male somehow because she has short hair or wears hoodies. That is completely meaningless. She is a woman with short hair who wears hoodies and had her breasts removed.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

Why do you care so much what he or she wants to be called and how he or she views him or herself? It's their business, not yours, isn't it?

Why do they care so much what I call them?
It's my business, not theirs, isn't it?

why does anybody really care? it doesn't even affect you really, does it?

why would you insist on calling somebody the genitalia that they were born with when they'd prefer not to be called that?

I don't think it helps people (long term) to lie to them.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

I attended a large discussion about transgenderism in the woods at Confest (a nudist hippy festival). The discussion was moderated by three trans people. Somebody asked the question, "What is left after we finish deconstructing gender?"

The response (from the moderators) was, "Perhaps nothing. We will have to wait and see."

I agree that the transgender movement is part of the deconstruction of gender, which is natural and inevitable in a free society that is exploring self-identity... but I strongly suspect that nothing will be left.

I spoke to the mod who answered the question and they agreed. They no longer identify as male or female and they are bisexual.

Maleness is an illusion that is projected upon boys. Some boys would rather opt for the illusion of femaleness. I understand that, but neither illusion means anything to me. Beyond the illusion of gender, there is sex.

Men are raised, as young boys, to be future men. Some of them may be more suited to roles that are more traditionally female. I am a nurse, which is an industry that is heavily dominated by women.

I don't think girls should be raised to be female. Ironically, the major roadblock (for me) to raise my daughter as gender neutral is the transgender movement... I don't want to encourage her to go down a path if that means she is more likely to have surgery or have puberty blockers. It is safer to raise her traditionally.

This is unfortunate, because I've always despised gender.

 

[Jabberwocky]

The transgender movement is the most frightening aspect of far-left PC culture dictating what people are allowed to say and do.

i don't think it is. mainly because i despise far left ideologies and don't want to be associated with them in any way. its not dictating what people are allowed to say to assert that if you behave in a certain way, that is disrespectful and hurtful. i actually consider 'live and let live' to be a liberal stance, not authoritarian.

At the end of the day, nobody (aside from a select few) actually think trans women are women. A lot of the people on the pro-trans side of the argument - which is the clear minority - believe that trans women are not women, but trans women... but, we're supposed to treat them like they're women?

i have treated the trans women i have met like women because to do otherwise would harm them. i do not believe they are mentally ill on the whole- but there may be some instances where gender dysphoria arises out of a treatable mental illness.

the only time i would not treat a trans woman like a woman would be if she had transitioned after completing her education and starting out professionally, by which time she would have benefitted from male privilege, and started trying to tell me what it means for me to be a woman. i am not fucking having anyone who has experienced male privilege trying to co opt my own experiences as theirs. but, that has not happened yet, i don't anticipate it to happen (mainly because i don't think trans people are deluded enough to deny their own history). if it does i'd do better to just shut up than get involved in what would be an emotive argument from both sides.

Are their penises biologically female?

what would you consider transgender men's penises? and really what does the contents of someone's underwear mean to you? i am not denying the separation between biological sex and gender- though both are far more nuanced than many people think.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

(1) what would you consider transgender men's penises? (2) and really what does the contents of someone's underwear mean to you?

(1) I assume you mean a transgender woman's penis? A super hot "trans woman" with a dick is a skinny man who is dressed and made up like a woman. It really makes no sense that one gender wears make-up and one gender shaves legs, etc. Breast implants don't make you female. I'd rather trans women not get breast implants, honestly. I don't like fake tits on women and they tend to look worse on trans women.

(2) I don't understand the question. Am I fucking this person?

its not dictating what people are allowed to say to assert that if you behave in a certain way, that is disrespectful and hurtful.

See Canada.

the only time i would not treat a trans woman like a woman would be if she had transitioned after completing her education and starting out professionally, by which time she would have benefitted from male privilege, and started trying to tell me what it means for me to be a woman. i am not fucking having anyone who has experienced male privilege trying to co opt my own experiences as theirs.

Wow.

i have treated the trans women i have met like women because to do otherwise would harm them.

Do you apply that logic fundamentally to all your encounters with people? I'm sure you don't. Let me know if you'd like me to come up with some examples.

Assuming that you don't, how do you determine whether or not it applies in this situation?

...

Also, I disagree that it will harm them.

 

[Jabberwocky]

(1) I assume you mean a transgender woman's penis?

no. a transgender man who has undergone phalloplasty.

(2) I don't understand the question. Am I fucking this person?

so what does it matter whether they have a dick or not. that's the entire point, you aren't fucking them so their genitals are irrelevant.

Do you apply that logic fundamentally to all your encounters with people? I'm sure you don't. Let me know if you'd like me to come up with some examples.

actually i aim to but i often fail (even if i weren't autistic i don't think its possible for another person to always know which course of action will cause the least harm), even when i remember to think before i speak/act. i am studying buddhism as it has helped me greatly in my recovery from drug addiction and the principle of non harm is fundamental to it.

i am however, extremely interested in how you can provide me with examples where i have not applied that principle in my decision making. i have never met a genuine psychic before and it would be quite exciting to have someone who understands the intentions that govern my actions better than i do. so, please do give me some examples.

Also, I disagree that it will harm them.

you are entitled to do so and i am entitled to think you are wrong- further i think that some of the attitudes expressed in this thread contribute to the high levels of hate crime against transgender people and thus cause them harm.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

no. a transgender man who has undergone phalloplasty.

Oh, I see. I'm sorry. I don't see it as a penis and I don't think a trans woman's vagina is a vagina either. It's closer to a vagina than it is to an asshole, but it isn't really close to either (not talking proximity).

so what does it matter whether they have a dick or not. that's the entire point, you aren't fucking them so their genitals are irrelevant.

Their genitals are irrelevant to what, this discussion?
Aren't we talking about whether or not Elliot Page is a man?

actually i aim to but i often fail

Don't beat yourself up about it. It's impossible.

i am however, extremely interested in how you can provide me with examples where i have not applied that principle in my decision making.

Okay, I'll have a whack at it. The sarcasm is unnecessary. I'm being over confident or narrow-minded perhaps. I'm not sober and I'm making assumptions about you. For that, I apologize (about the assumptions, not my indulgence).

(1)

You seem like a pretty learned chap, so I'm sure you've heard of Phantom Limb Syndrome and Body Integrity Identity Disorder. If not, the first is the feeling that you still have an amputated limb. The second (often) is the opposite: wanting the limb to be removed.

If somebody is extremely agitated about the presence of an arm that they disconnect with, do you tell them they should amputate it?

(2)

Somebody has a gun. You are tied to a chair. They tell you to pledge allegiance to the Royal Society of Buttholes or they will kill a squirrel. You suspect that your endorsement of the RSB might contribute to the deaths of dozens of other squirrels. Do you say the thing that prevents one squirrel being harmed or would you rather destroy an unknown number?

(3)

If someone believed they were Black, would you call them Black?

(4)

If someone believed they were Elvis, would you call them Elvis?

(5)

If someone believes they are indigenous do they deserve benefits designated for indigenous Australians?

...

We haven't interacted much. I don't know where you draw the line. I fundamentally believe that it is healthier for people if they are told the truth. I say this because I've experienced the pain and suffering that can result from being fed the information that you want to hear.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

i think that some of the attitudes expressed in this thread contribute to the high levels of hate crime against transgender people and thus cause them harm.

Is that on me, is it?

If you're going to make an accusation, you should be specific.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Is that on me, is it?

If you're going to make an accusation, you should be specific.

its on everyone who insists on calling transgender men women and vice versa, including you. i appreciate that you have actually put in effort to articulate your views and are prepared to debate them.

we are talking about whether Elliott Page is a man but i feel that by bringing up genitals you are conflating biological sex and gender. these are not the same, and as far as i know the exact distinction- which certainly exists - is poorly understood.

i take your point about 'where is the line' - but apart from your trolley problem analogue all of your examples seem to be predicated on mental illness. as i do not think that gender dysphoria is a mental illness they are not directly comparable. there is medical evidence that transgender people have physiological differences to cisgender people so i don't really see how it can be considered a delusion- i would be very surprised if any of your examples based on delusion, were we to find some and scan their brains, had analogous differences (though its quite possible their brains might have some physiological differences to normal brains) to those observed in studies of transgender people.

edit: i am a woman not a chap. i don't get offended about being misgendered but its pretty annoying.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

its on everyone who insists on calling transgender men women and vice versa, including you

I haven't called anyone to their face a man if they present as a woman (or vice versa) so I don't see how it applies to me. I'm not sure anyone in this thread has done so.

Should people not express opinions in a thread about transgenderism?

Do you only want one opinion?
What is the point of the thread?

you are conflating biological sex and gender. these are not the same, and as far as i know the exact distinction- which certainly exists - is poorly understood.

They aren't clearly defined and they overlap. If they didn't overlap, I'd be more likely to acknowledge them as distinctly different things.

Gender is a social construct. Sex is the real gender.

there is medical evidence that transgender people have physiological differences to cisgender people

Present the source. Let's discuss it.

I'm not sure what your speculation about brain scans has to do with the price of fish.

 

[cduggles]

For a perhaps more relevant example, homosexuality was classified as a mental disorder until DSM III-R. Same-sex marriage is now legal in the United States.

The medical establishment still has some hangers on to antiquated ideas like conversion therapy, but for the most part doesn’t regard homosexuality as something to be “cured”.

I think the transgender community seeks the same acceptance, and that is both a political and social movement, which is unfortunately intertwined with the medical view (not the DSM classification, as gender dysphoria is currently about distress level, not one’s gender orientation per se). Here I refer to medical treatments being evaluated as beneficial or harmful to transsexual individuals. Objective research on medical outcomes even in case studies is quite difficult in the current environment, which is quite unfortunate.

 

[alasdairm]

I haven't called anyone to their face a man if they present as a woman (or vice versa) so I don't see how it applies to me.

but your responses in this thread suggest that, if you met a transsexual woman in real life and she asked you to refer to her as 'she'/her you would insist on referring to her as 'he/him'.

please correct me if that's wrong.

on this issue and some of the responses, i console myself that, in the same way that shitty tippers will surely be reincarnated as wait-staff who have to serve people like their former selves, some people in this thread will be reincarnated as a woman trapped in a man's body or a man trapped in a woman's body. they'll know with every fiber of their being that their physical body and sex are just wrong.

they'll be miserable and misunderstood. they'll try to get help and understanding and they'll seek just a little compassion and understanding. but people like their former self will just spit on them and tell them they're mentally ill...

alasdair