[d.sound]

What you did, dipping the toe in the water as they say is the only way forward to figuring yourself out. Like, realizing your feelings aren't as clear cut is a step toward figuring them out, if you get me. This has been in your head and now it is on the outside, seen by your peers, being scrutinized by others. That is some major vulnerability.

It would be wonderful to know beforehand exactly what an experience will be like, any new experience in life, but you never know until you are in it.

Everybody coming to terms with something like this is going to wonder if they are really sure they know what they are doing, especially at your age. I was 34 when I transitioned 100% full time. I was in and out of the closet a number of times.

As this settles down, and you get a better understanding of others reactions and perspective of you, you may feel more comfortable about it.

I think what can be difficult is knowing however you present yourself, people will have their own perception. When I was presenting as a guy with clothes I hated, etc, I realized it wasn't any better than my fear of being seen as some sort of "freak" for presenting female. Some people are going to see me as a freak no matter what I do. I'd rather not have to fit into the standard mold just to make that aspect of life slightly easier. Wearing the clothes I want makes me happier. My friends calling me Danielle makes me happier. The real people, the people that matter, will love you no matter what. If someone will only tolerate you as what they want you to be, their opinions are worthless.

[!@#$%!]

must spread more rep

[Toilet & Bowels]

What do you think about people like Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, and their arguments about trans people?

[Rob Instigator]

Being true to oneself is the most difficult thing, in this world of mass confusion and forced similarities.

Live your own truth. No one else will do it for you.

Also, please remember that anyone who has a bad reaction to you or your truth, is actually someone who needs to learn, and so do not just write them off completely. Your life and your experience is what alters the mindsets of those around you, especially the ones who are entrenched in false assumptions and misguided hate. Stay strong, do not let their negativity and ignorance get you down.

[Rob Instigator]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

What do you think about people like Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, and their arguments about trans people?

don;t know the person you refer to, but standard-gendered people talking shit about transgender people is as ignorant and pointless as Catholic Priests giving marriage/relationship advice.

[Toilet & Bowels]

People like her aren't taking shit about trans people. As a guy if an intelligent cis women makes a point about womanhood who am i to dismiss it?

There are lot of prominent feminists who say that trans women are their own thing, and not the same as cis women, the response they get is as if they said trans people are not human.

[EVOLghost]

Curious as to why that is? Is it being able to give birth and the stuff that goes along with it menstruation n stuff? I'm curious and not debating anyside...just here to listen...

[choc e-Claire]

Ah man, fucking TERFs.

Basically, a TERF is a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (hence the acronym). It's fairly easy to write off a lot of anti-trans bigotry as just being from ignorant old boomers, but TERFs are different. A lot of their arguments boil down to "trans women aren't real women, and should be excluded from women's spaces". And while - yes, I get that there's a difference; but it's still really fucking painful seeing that trans women are being excluded and vilified based solely on birth.
They'll often call themselves as "gender critical", but the stuff they'll espouse is still pretty clearly biased - "what if there's a penis in a women's restroom???", "won't somebody please think of the children?", etc. They just coat it in a flavouring of "protecting 'real' women", rather than just being openly transphobic. :/

[d.sound]

Another angle is that trans women had a previous life as a man, giving them "male privilege", which makes it impossible for them to truly identify with female experience.

Another thing that sucks about being trans: chasers. Men who pursue trans women as a fetishized sexual object. They think all trans women are what they see in male-targeted pornography. Non-persons who only want to be pounded in the ass and guzzle cock. It's SO gross. I've been looking at dating sites and most don't automatically block males. I don't even click on their messages. It's a little trickier IRL. I suppose it's like any other woman. You can't tell if they are being friendly or are after something else. A dude hit on me the other day. I'm a friendly person so I had a conversation, but I don't know how to drop the hint. I need a shirt that says "LESBIAN".

[choc e-Claire]

Oh damn, chasers are the fucking worst (at least from my idea about it).

Unlike you, I like guys, so it'll be a challenge trying to find guys who are sweet and caring amongst a midst of guys who are fetishists. Maybe I just need to stick to bisexuals.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by choc e-Claire

Ah man, fucking TERFs.

Basically, a TERF is a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (hence the acronym). It's fairly easy to write off a lot of anti-trans bigotry as just being from ignorant old boomers, but TERFs are different. A lot of their arguments boil down to "trans women aren't real women, and should be excluded from women's spaces". And while - yes, I get that there's a difference; but it's still really fucking painful seeing that trans women are being excluded and vilified based solely on birth.
They'll often call themselves as "gender critical", but the stuff they'll espouse is still pretty clearly biased - "what if there's a penis in a women's restroom???", "won't somebody please think of the children?", etc. They just coat it in a flavouring of "protecting 'real' women", rather than just being openly transphobic. :/

I know what TERF means. I don't think any of these people have any kind of anti-trans agenda or are bigots, and frankly I call into question a person born male telling a woman like for example Germaine Greer that they know better about what counts as a woman than she does. Generally the arguements against these people are either ad hominem (e.g. they are old bigots), straw man (e.g. what they are saying appears to be this but is really just cloaked transphobia) or apeals to emotion (we're the victims and it hurts our feelings when people question us).


I'm just sumarising what I see and don't have any particular stake in the argument. Personally I think gender is nonsense and everyone's pronouns should be neutral. And if you have to differentiate (say for medical reasons or whatever) do it by chromosomes, xx or xy (or xxy or xyy).


Also rather than forcing people to cohabit the best solution to the women's toilet issue is to have a three sets of toilets, mens womens & free.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by EVOLghost

Curious as to why that is? Is it being able to give birth and the stuff that goes along with it menstruation n stuff? I'm curious and not debating anyside...just here to listen...

The lived experience of women and girls that men are not part of, basically all the reasons feminism has existed for.

[!@#$%!]

the problem with trusting novelists is that they’re used to spinning a lot of very coherent and believable bullshit which has no basis in reality. a great talent for entertainment—but with no scientific value.

there is a landmark experiment that shows how the language brain will cook up all manner of justifications for absurdities. see: https://physics.weber.edu/carroll/ho...plit_brain.htm

this applies to everyone, including scientificists like lobster-man.

by scientificist i mean those who elevate empirical science to religious status. which isn’t really science, just ideological extrapolation. e.g. social darwinism.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

the problem with trusting novelists is that they’re used to spinning a lot of very coherent and believable bullshit which has no basis in reality. a great talent for entertainment—but with no scientific value.

there is a landmark experiment that shows how the language brain will cook up all manner of justifications for absurdities. see: https://physics.weber.edu/carroll/ho...plit_brain.htm

this applies to everyone, including scientificists like lobster-man.

by scientificist i mean those who elevate empirical science to religious status. which isn’t really science, just ideological extrapolation. e.g. social darwinism.

Is this a non-sequiteur posing as an arguement?

[ilduclo]

choose your fighter

[choc e-Claire]

Originally Posted by ilduclo

choose your fighter

I'm conflicted here - do I bother to try and throw my weight around in an argument that ultimately won't change anything, or do I tap out?

[ilduclo]

Originally Posted by choc e-Claire

I'm conflicted here - do I bother to try and throw my weight around in an argument that ultimately won't change anything, or do I tap out?

not worth arguing about, IMO. Those particular feminists are wrong, end of discussion

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

Is this a non-sequiteur posing as an arguement?

sure you can recognize a meta-argument, yes?

eta: and “birth,” lol

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by choc e-Claire

I'm conflicted here - do I bother to try and throw my weight around in an argument that ultimately won't change anything, or do I tap out?

i disagree with ilducio here. while he might have the wiser perspective, yours is the time to be a li’l ferocious and fanatical (just a little, don’t overdo it)

the khmer rouge didn’t select 12 year olds for nothing

[choc e-Claire]

Eh, I'm not really in the mood for it. Last night I had to explain to a 14 year old on Discord why dysphoria is different to just wishing you were better looking, so :/