BeHereNow

Trans women are women! Why? Love and Truth that's why

194 posts in this topic

41 minutes ago, BenG said:

“huhh?? But how does sex work? Them parts don’t fit together!” You sound like my homophonic grandpa.

Unless you’re planning to have sex with a transgender person (they’d definitely tell you first) you don’t need to worry your little head about it, buddy.

Ok.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BenG said:

Now, do your best to hold a straight face while you say (out loud) that he’s a woman…

That's because he is a trans-man. We don't have to have all of these things fit into the same category.

The point @Carl-Richard is trying to make is that both the category of man and woman do not fit here. As you pointed out, people would definitely not consider this person a woman. On the other hand, Carl correctly pointed out that if individuals would see their genitalia, they would also not consider this individual a man.

Well, it happens that there is a perfect label for this kind of individual! A trans-man. Someone who was born a woman and transitioned to become more aligned with the characterisitics of a man. Viola, no confusion, everyone is happy!

Why the need to collapse the concept of trans-man and man? Why is that so important? The difference will always be there, whether you label it the same or not.

Edited by Scholar

Glory to Israel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BenG said:

Because a trans-man is a man. That’s the point of the “man” part. A cis-man is also a man.. see? Both men.

The trans prefix doesn’t negate the “man” part.

That depends on how you construct the categories. You can't say one or the other thing is the case, because these categories are socially constructed. If you want to advocate for new categories, then do that. But don't pretend like you are describing reality. All we are doing is creating labels.


Glory to Israel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BenG said:

The trans prefix doesn’t negate the “man” part.

If it doesn't negate the man part, then why is it important to use the label of "man" rather than the label of "trans-man"? In other words, whats being taken away by using the label: trans-man rather than the label: man?

Edited by zurew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BenG said:

Because a trans-man is a man. That’s the point of the “man” part. A cis-man is also a man.. see? Both men.

The trans prefix doesn’t negate the “man” part.

If you're using the self-ID definition of man/woman, then trans-man doesn't mean anything.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BenG said:

Nobody’s creating new categories. Trans and cis man/woman have been well established categories for a long time.

Of course they are, and the fact that you are not realizing this is damaging the trans movement.

We have the category of a woman, for example. If you show a nude trans woman to most people, they will not consider that a woman, they will insist it is a trans woman. So it cannot be the case that the categories of woman and man are supercategories. Trans woman does not translate to "A woman who is trans", it actually translates to "A man who transition to appear as a woman". That's actually the way this category works for most people.

If you keep insisting this is not the case, then you will continue running into a wall, and all you will be left with is call people transphobic. You won't be able to convince anyone, because your own understanding of what is happening is lacking.

 

So, you do want to destroy old categories and create new ones. If you did not, people wouldn't be confused about what you are doing, nor would they be resisting.


Glory to Israel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BenG said:

I don’t know what gave you the impression that I have a preference for either. Just don’t misgender people.

52 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Why the need to collapse the concept of trans-man and man? Why is that so important? The difference will always be there, whether you label it the same or not.

47 minutes ago, BenG said:

Because a trans-man is a man. That’s the point of the “man” part. A cis-man is also a man.. see? Both men.

The trans prefix doesn’t negate the “man” part.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BenG said:

Why not?

Self-ID definition: "a man is somebody who identifies as a man". It doesn't tell you what a man is.

It then follows that a trans-man is somebody who transitions to somebody who identifies as a man. It doesn't tell you what a trans-man is.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BenG said:

Then actually, I am the expert here. 

Then sure you won't have a hard time to debate/enlighten us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BenG said:

OK, so on the issue we seemed to be clashing on before...

This is a fact by the way, not a topic that's up for debate... "man" and "woman" aren't defined by biology or genitalia. At all.. That's a well established consensus among academics. At this point, it's so well established that anybody who disagrees isn't even taken seriously in most academic circles.

There's actually no such thing as a biological man or a biological woman. At all..

What definition do they use? I'm sure they don't use the definition of self-identification either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BenG said:

This is a fact by the way, not a topic that's up for debate... "man" and "woman" aren't defined by biology or genitalia. At all.. That's a well established consensus among academics. At this point, it's so well established that anybody who disagrees isn't even taken seriously in most academic circles.

No.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2022 at 0:13 PM, Consept said:

This can be difficult though, the way i see it as humans we are like conduits for different energies, the masculine and feminine are extremely powerful and important energies. Usually boys and men are the best conduit for masculine energy and women and girls are the best for feminine, of course this is not to say that there cant be great conduits in the reverse I'm just talking generally. So i think its important that healthy masculinity be taught to boys and healthy femininity taught to girls, if it so happens that a boy shows feminine traits then there is no problem in teaching them healthy femininity. Both sexes should also be taught about the other energy and look for it in themselves as well. The key thing is that the other side should not be demonised, it should be understood, explored and integrated. 

So i dont think we should suppress or ignore this polarisation at an early age and in fact i would suggest that because we have been doing that in the last few decades, ie encouraging men to be more feminine and women to be more masculine or at least to lessen these energies, we have seen a decline in relationships not only a rise in divorce but overall happiness. Dating is also harder for men because they are no longer as masculine as they were and that is what is attractive to women. (I actually experienced this at a speed dating event a few years ago where women were complaining about the men) 

Great post!!


The same strength, the same level of desire it takes to change your life, is the same strength, the same level of desire it takes to end your life. Notice you are headed towards one or the other. - Razard86

Your ACTIONS REVEAL how you REALLY FEEL. Want TRUTH? Observe and ADMIT, do the OPPOSITE of what you usually do which is observe and DENY. - Razard86

Think about it.....Leo gave the best definition of the truth I ever heard...."The truth is what is..." so if that is the truth.... YOUR ACTIONS IN THE PRESENT ARE THE TRUTH!! It's what's happening....do you like what you see? Can you accept it? You are just a SENTIENT MIRROR, OBSERVING ITS REFLECTION..... can you accept what appears? -Razard86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BenG said:

I really don't know why you're arguing with me, dude. Nobody worth their weight (in modern times) supports the bio-essentialist definition. Like actually nobody! It's shunned in universities!

Well, you saying that over and over does not make it true.


Glory to Israel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BenG said:

I really don't know why you're arguing with me, dude. Nobody worth their weight (in modern times) supports the bio-essentialist definition. Like actually nobody! It's shunned in universities!

You're referring to one subset of academia. In philosophy and gender theory, you're talking about the "Ameliorative Inquirists" ("let's try to make the category of man/woman as inclusive as possible"), which spawned the self-ID definition.

On the contrary, many trans-inclusive philosophers are in fact bio-essentialists, because they've concluded that the AI's mission is untenable while trying to adhere to the standards of analytic philosophy, which again, has to do with things like the circularity of the self-ID definition.

That is why I say that your mission is actually not about changing the definitions of words, but instead about changing how words are used socially, because you don't want me to adopt a definition that tells me what the category of man/woman really means (because again, the self-ID definition cannot do that). You really just want me to talk to trans people a certain way, and I'm mostly fine with that.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nahm would have said that there are males and females, there are no trans people. All is love. God bless his heart. He was misunderstood.


In Tate we trust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do u define a car?

How do u define a house?

I tried to contemplate these questions and realized u can't define anything in existence perfectly. 

Definitions are a made up thing anyways. U can define things whichever way u like it. But for practical purposes it's probably better to have a consensus upon each definition.

Edited by Salvijus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BenG And btw, the reason I don't like the social constructivist definition of woman is because when I say "I'm going to find myself a woman", I don't actually think to myself whether she "inhabits the norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman". It just doesn't occur to me. And if she doesn't like to wear dresses or doesn't have many feminine interests, I don't really care. The things that actually come to mind and that I actually care about is that we can have sex, maybe have children, and that she exudes feminine energy, and "adult human female" is a good enough proxy for that. If I didn't care about those things, I would just get a boyfriend ?


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

How do u define a car?

How do u define a house?

I tried to contemplate these questions and realized u can't define anything in existence perfectly. 

Definitions are a made up thing anyways. U can define things whichever way u like it. But for practical purposes it's probably better to have a consensus upon each definition.

You don't need a perfect definition, nor a consensus. Just find the one that works best for you. That said, when you're interacting in the social world, you're following different rules than those inside your own head. So just like you wouldn't be an asshole to anybody in particular, don't be an asshole to trans people.


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BeHereNow Hey look, you are valid as hell, but I sense there is a lot of anger in your writing. Focus on loving yourself, not on defending yourself. You don't need to defend your identity from anyone. You are safe but as long as you feel safe.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BenG said:

@Carl-Richard btw I heard you are Norwegian. That’s a beautiful country! I’ve been 3 times. It’s totally surreal to watch what the sun does in the middle of summer over there. I’m jealous that you get to live in such an amazing part of the world. I celebrate Syttende Mai every year even though I’m American. ??

Oh, you're Norwegian American? I just watched a documentary on Norwegian Americans :D Hearing them sing the Norwegian national anthem was so interesting xD

15:06 When the old guy speaks the language, it sounds like a TV program from the 1930s xD

 


Intrinsic joy is revealed in the marriage of meaning and being.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now