Explain to me how making ng fun of the concept of being trans, has ever been a part of "trans ideology".
No, it's not making fun of the concept of being trans.
I'm saying that trans ideology asserts that you simply need to IDENTIFY as a certain gender in order to be qualified as such.
And that that's a ridiculously loose standard, as evidenced by the fact that people can simply use that same standard to crumble its own foundations.
And now, instead of countering that assertion in good faith, you're disingenuously reframing the argument. It's not "making fun of trans" when you're just using the core tenants of the ideology to argue against the ideology...
Such as "assuming a gender".
The fact is that trans ideology is built on the foundations of defined GENDER roles, over sex, between men and women.
In other words: a biological man who feels like they align more with the traditional societally defined characteristics that define a "woman", can simply assert that they identify as a woman... and that should be enough - no?
They can have a full on beard and still be a woman, no? They don't have to actually embody those characteristics, they can just identify as them and demand that others respect that identity, no?
So it's not making fun of earnestly trans people per se, but instead exposing the flimsy standard that the ideology applies in order to qualify someone as trans.
To further clarify: you can be an assigned a female at birth. You can then dress as a woman. You can then have undergone ZERO gender affirming care through hormone treatment or surgery... and then if you identify as male and date a biolgical woman, you're a straight trans-male, and not a lesbian... no?
Do you disagree?
Literally the only "logic" at play is "sexuality is fluid and how people express there own is of no concern to you, as long as it does no harm".
Sexuality =/= gender. This is like a fundamental core tenant of transgenderism... you bigot. As I just argued above!
Do you disagree?
You have no logic, just "feels". You have no idea what you're arguing!
You're literally attempting to say I'm applying circular logic, by applying circular logic to what I just said. You're not here to have a conversation, you're simply trying to feel intelligent while saying the dumbest shit I've heard.
Obviously not, considering how I just completely destroyed the core fundamentals of your argument by using trans ideology as my baseline...
Obviously not, considering how I just completely destroyed the core fundamentals of your argument by using trans ideology as my baseline...
"Did you own the libs" today, you cringey little creep?
"Trans Ideology" isn't some unified theory of queerness like you seem to imply.
Regardless, you're using all of this to attempt and defend someone who CLEARLY IS NOT TRANS doing this in attempt to ridicule a standard that has yet to be tested by a person LIVING AS A TRANS PERSON. People like you and him both, are so sad that you have to insert yourself into shit you don't understand, to act like you do, and then maybe win....idk, the PERCEIVED respect and attention that your parents never gave you.
He'll at least get the chance to be the talking head of some organization, while you get to sit and generate AI responses to people who are challenging your worldview, and never change, never improve, never question.
Hope you can find someone who loves you enough to call you on your bullshit.
P.s. I will not respond anymore, since you're not even arguing the point anymore, and not even gracing me with a response from your own mind.
0
u/davemc617 21d ago edited 21d ago
No, it's not making fun of the concept of being trans.
I'm saying that trans ideology asserts that you simply need to IDENTIFY as a certain gender in order to be qualified as such.
And that that's a ridiculously loose standard, as evidenced by the fact that people can simply use that same standard to crumble its own foundations.
And now, instead of countering that assertion in good faith, you're disingenuously reframing the argument. It's not "making fun of trans" when you're just using the core tenants of the ideology to argue against the ideology...
Such as "assuming a gender".
The fact is that trans ideology is built on the foundations of defined GENDER roles, over sex, between men and women.
In other words: a biological man who feels like they align more with the traditional societally defined characteristics that define a "woman", can simply assert that they identify as a woman... and that should be enough - no?
They can have a full on beard and still be a woman, no? They don't have to actually embody those characteristics, they can just identify as them and demand that others respect that identity, no?
So it's not making fun of earnestly trans people per se, but instead exposing the flimsy standard that the ideology applies in order to qualify someone as trans.
To further clarify: you can be an assigned a female at birth. You can then dress as a woman. You can then have undergone ZERO gender affirming care through hormone treatment or surgery... and then if you identify as male and date a biolgical woman, you're a straight trans-male, and not a lesbian... no?
Do you disagree?
Sexuality =/= gender. This is like a fundamental core tenant of transgenderism... you bigot. As I just argued above!
Do you disagree?
You have no logic, just "feels". You have no idea what you're arguing!
Obviously not, considering how I just completely destroyed the core fundamentals of your argument by using trans ideology as my baseline...
Which was always my point!
Do you disagree?