BeHereNow

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

233 posts in this topic

@JoeVolcano What do you even mean by things getting done? Doesnt achieving more loving accepting society where trans people dont get raped 7x more etc. count as things getting done? Do you think world should just remain stuck in this place that serves the privileged? 

Also like sports, I already said this somewhere, but if you care about fairness, dont look at gender, just look at performance, speed, resilience... If you still think gender is a factor here idk what to tell you. Should Magnus Carlsen compete with a beginner chess player just bcz theyre both male? Even within genders you have inadequacies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JoeVolcano Thats easy to say when you dont get hate crime for wearing what you want, called wrong pronouns and names, assumed about so much, considered a threat, not automatically accepted by family, bullied for who you are etc. Dont minimize peoples experiences. You dont even know how long theyve been questioning and how long theyve had to "grow out". Id rather have the entire cisgender community grow out of selfishness and entitlement though. You already receive more life every day, because all these things dont apply to you, not even mentioning rape and suicide statistics. There are millions of trans people in the world, its not just some petty personal cause, and they dont receive the love that you do in so many areas of life. Your life can still be difficult in other ways, but dont forget that trans people also have lives and they have the discrimination plus all the other challenges. That is what drives so many to kill themselves. If you see that as something that should be overlooked for your own comfort of not having to respect people, if you see people as radical for wanting equal rights, then thats pretty damn disgusting.

Share this post


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

The biological essentialist definition is inconsistent by the logical definition of inconsistent, (produces contradictions). "makes the most sense to me" doesn't actually give a definition more weight logically speaking. 

A circular definition is fundamentally inconsistent, which is what I was referring to.

 

16 hours ago, BenG said:

You're right though, I really don't care about logically consistent definitions. Not unless you can actually find one in which case I'll care a lot. Good luck with that. What I care about right now are definitions which are constructed for the soul purpose of excluding certain groups of people. (biological essentialist definition in a nutshell). Indeed, the fascist definition.

A circular definition is actually not a definition at all. You just want people to not use definitions?


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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gender is how you are, how you think and how you act are all in alignment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

13 minutes ago, JoeVolcano said:

Trying to fit into any definition, or trying to fit any definition to you, is exactly what takes you out of alignment.

its the reverse, you define it, you are it and so it is alignment. 

Edited by integral

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, JoeVolcano said:

How is that even a gender issue. Everyone has that issue. That's "the human condition", the divided state. Adding gender to it doesn't help, it only hinders. Trying to fit into any definition, or trying to fit any definition to you, is exactly what takes you out of alignment.

"People of themselves don't go for truth. They try to adapt society to their desires. And they go where they can get favorable answers. And they associate with people that flatter them. But that isn't truth." - Richard Rose

Cheers

Why are you so obtuse? Do the existence of trans and gender non-conforming people take you out of alignment? Seriously, like from direct experience you can't just wish the gender dysphoria away like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, JoeVolcano said:

The dysphoria only exists because of definitions. I'm not trying to dismiss this stuff, I'm trying to show the way out.

Wow, not only did you prove my point but I find sentence to be very condescending too. Don't take that as me accusing you as being transphobic or anything but it just comes as ignorant and myopic if I'm being honest.

Gender Dysphoria isn't some tumblr wumblr nonsense, it's an actual diagnosable condition that I have and the treatment can have positive consequences for people. There was a time last year I felt so hopeless about my transition that I attempted to go back for a while, but that was one of the worst mistakes of my life. I felt gross, anxious and very suicidal. Presenting as a male, performing in that role and just people having masculine expectations of you, when you feel down to your soul that you're a woman, it feels damn right degrading and humiliating. Yeah, I bought it on to myself when I attempted to detrans so I have no one else to blame but still, why would you expect others to go through that just to say, "they're in alignment"? 

Hopefully this will show you another point of view.

Cheers :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They're walking around
Head full of sound
Acting like
We don't exist
They walk in the room
And stare right through you
Talking like
We don't exist
But we exist
Daddy it's true
I'm different from you
But tell me why they treat me like this?
If you turned away
What would I say?
Not the first betrayed by a kiss

Maybe it's true
They're staring at you
When you walk in the room
Tell 'em it's fine
Stare if you like
Just let us through
Just let us through
Na na na na na na na
Na na na na na na na

They're down on their knees
Begging us please
Praying that we don't exist
Daddy it's fine
I'm used to 'em now
But tell me why they treat me like this?
It's cause we do it like this

Na na na na na na na
Na na na na na na na
Maybe it's true
They're staring at you
When you walk in the room
Tell 'em it's fine
Stare if you like
Just let us through
Just let us through

Let 'em stare! Let 'em stare!
If that's all they can do!
But I'd lose my heart
If I turned away from you

Oh Daddy don't turn away
You know that I'm so scared
But will you watch me drown?
You know we're going nowhere
We know that we're young
And no shit we're confused
But will you watch us drown?
What are you so afraid to lose?

Down on your knees
Begging us please
Praying that we don't exist
You're down on your knees
Begging us please
Praying that we don't exist
We exist!
We exist!

Down on your knees
Begging us please
Praying that we don't exist
You're down on your knees
Begging us please
Praying that we don't exist
We exist!
We exist!
We exist!
We exist! Na na na na na na na, na na na na na na na, na na na na na na na

Maybe if you hang together
You can make the changes in our hearts
And if you hang together, you can change us
Just where should you start?


"I would rather be wrong, than live in the shadow of your song. Now my mind is open wide, and now I'm ready to Star(t)!" - Arcade Fire "Ready to Start"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JoeVolcano Don't preach deconstruction to people who are in a mode of construction.

Just, let it go. -_-


"I would rather be wrong, than live in the shadow of your song. Now my mind is open wide, and now I'm ready to Star(t)!" - Arcade Fire "Ready to Start"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

What is a woman?

A human in which the expression of the feminine principle is dominant over the masculine principle.

The feminine and the masculine principle are intangible and immaterial. They are a dual substrate of reality, which can be compared to a binary codebase. These two poles get incarnated in material forms, in which they retain their expression. But in all form expression, a blend of the masculine and feminine principle is used. Nothing, and no one is only masculine or only feminine. The two always come together.

We tend to recognize what are masculine and feminine expressions, because there are forms all around us that are dominantly composed with masculine and feminine. From there, we notice patterns, and build up archetypes of what is masculine and feminine by observing their different displays all over nature.

Regarding these questions, a lot of people (including in this thread) are falling in the trap of believing that when it comes to gender, materiality supersede the essence. And so, as a result, they subscribe to biological essentialism. But that's nothing but another display of stage Orange materialism transposed to the gender question. Someone's got a vagina = it's a woman. Someone's got a dick= it's a man. But sex, and birth physiology are only part of someone's potential expression. There is still a lot of room for leaning towards the other polarity through other characteristics, as such as someone's personality per exemple.

What matters is the total sum of the energetic balance, and this is occurring at different levels of being. On a forum dedicated to consciousness, the concept of being more than just the body shouldn't be too complex to understand for most.

Self-identification is not really relevant, though. I'm saying this because it's very often used in Stage Green circles. But ultimately, there are no identities. Thinking of oneself as a man or as a woman is just ego, and self-referential thoughts are all nothing but deception. So it's not really a criteria for being a woman or for being a man.

Over the years, I have come to extend my definition of what is a woman. And just like with any other holon in reality, that definition ' transcends and includes' the previous ones. If your definition of what a woman is large enough, there is no need to pretend trans women are women because there a room for them.

For instance, this is Emma Ellingsen. She passes so well, that referring to her as a man will confuse most. 

---

Nature itself is the best source to observe a plurality of expressions. For instance, male seahorses are impregnated by female seahorses. They are the ones carrying their offspring and birthing them. 

 

Edited by Etherial Cat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

That is all true, but regardless of calling people by their preferred pronouns or not, if you were to choose the definition which makes the most sense (or the one you like the most), which one would you pick?

I got one, a woman is a human being (let's not debate this term lol) with XX Chromosomes who has clearly visible characteristics associated with what is known as woman. Breasts and a Vagina. I think that is the best one could do to make that label as specific as possible.

Trans would be a modifier. Like the word tall or short is a modifier. So a Trans woman would comprise a different definition. This is the best idea I can think of at this time.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

I got one, a woman is a human being (let's not debate this term lol) with XX Chromosomes who has clearly visible characteristics associated with what is known as woman. Breasts and a Vagina. I think that is the best one could do to make that label as specific as possible.

Trans would be a modifier. Like the word tall or short is a modifier. So a Trans woman would comprise a different definition. This is the best idea I can think of at this time.

https://healthjade.net/swyer-syndrome/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Razard86 said:

I got one, a woman is a human being (let's not debate this term lol) with XX Chromosomes who has clearly visible characteristics associated with what is known as woman. Breasts and a Vagina. I think that is the best one could do to make that label as specific as possible.

Trans would be a modifier. Like the word tall or short is a modifier. So a Trans woman would comprise a different definition. This is the best idea I can think of at this time.

You actually don't have to be very specific at all. You just need to have a general idea. Definitions will never be perfect, but with a circular definition, you have no idea what it means. It can mean anything.


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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

23 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Ok, so I'll address both of your points. You're using the self-identification definition, which is a circular definition which doesn't make sense in a purely analytical sense

Now, referring back to my earlier point, most people don't really care about definitions making logical sense or not — they simply use words to communicate and to relate to other people, and judging by how you're using an illogical definition, you probably fall under that category, and most trans activists do as well.

I'm saying that is actually fine, but now your movement is no longer about being logically consistent but solely promoting social responsibility, which means your focus should be on how people actually treat each other and not stuffing definitions down people's throats, because while most people don't give a fuck, some people actually prefer their definitions to be logically consistent, and you have no leverage there.

So, when I say "I think the bio-essentialist definition makes the most sense, but I'll still call trans people by their preferred pronouns", you should be very happy, because I'm following your social demands AND you have no business telling me which definitions make logical sense.

Bio-essentialism is not 'logically consistent', which is why it has been under attack for decades. 

Edited by Etherial Cat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Etherial Cat said:

Bio-essentialism is not 'logically consistant', which is why it has been under attack for decades. 

I think I should've said this instead: it's a definition, and self-ID is not even a definition.

Btw, you gave an essentialist definition as well earlier (only based on archetypal traits rather than biological traits), so according to some people, you're a transphobe as well :P


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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

A circular definition is fundamentally inconsistent, which is what I was referring to.

And your definition isn't consistent either. Since "logical consistency" was the whole basis for your argument, I'd say you're not in a very good spot here.

"glass houses" as they say..

6 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

A circular definition is actually not a definition at all.

You want to go down this road too? I will!

6 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

You just want people to not use definitions?

You can use whatever definition you want, but don't act like it's superior just because you like the most and then expect me to be too stupid to know any better.

What makes the self-identification definition more accurate is that it actually accounts for all women. As far as I'm aware, it's the only definition that even can. Instead of talking about logical definitions, why don't we talk about accurate definitions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Why is transgenderism considered legitimate but transracialism (or trans species) not considered legitimate, or is it?

Couldn't some random white person claim to be asian/black/etc and all the above arguments would hold?

Edited by Raptorsin7

Share this post


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

What makes the self-identification definition more accurate is that it actually accounts for all women. As far as I'm aware, it's the only definition that even can. Instead of talking about logical definitions, why don't we talk about accurate definitions?

It's not a definition though. It doesn't tell you what a woman is. Now, me expressing a preference for the bio-essentialist definition is not about logic per se, but the fact that it is a definition and self-ID is not has to do with logic.


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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BeHereNow You can't really be sure of that. 

Let's say someone had racial dysphoria, would you accept what they tell you about their race of choice?

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