[RD] HuffPost: "I Coined The Term 'Cisgender' 29 Years Ago. Here's What This Controversial Word Really Means."

So, Alison Clayton is also a transphobe?
 
So, Alison Clayton is also a transphobe?

Why, are you going to defend her as well if she is?

Anyway I'm sure there's no bias involved with Clayton and her open support of other anti-trans weirdos

Also it's pretty weird that most of her studies involve trashing trans healthcare, can't imagine why you'd defend her

Edit: Lmao she works in the history and philosophy department! And you think she's in anyway qualified to talk about trans healthcare? Give me a break

Edit 2: AND she works with other known anti-trans individuals who also advocate against trans healthcare!

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alison-Clayton-2

Why is this person working with people directly involved in pro-conversion therapy groups jesus christ and yet you think she isn't anti-trans?

If she isn't anti-trans then i have a bridge in new york to sell you
 
I believe this is called a "leading question". It's also a completely different argument from the one you were presenting before.

He's utterly indifferent to the fact that everyone he's mentioned so far has an obvious bias against trans people, as well as both having an overriding obsession with controlling trans people's bodies.

Really makes you wonder why
 
Which Alison Clayton are we referring to anyway? A bunch of different ones came up when I googled
 
So Jaime Reed is a "transphobe" but her statements seem in line with some peer reviewed documentation

In conclusion, this Letter has noted that although GAT for GD youth lacks a rigorous evidence base, it is undertaken as routine medical treatment in a strongly placebo effect enhancing environment. It is within this environment that research into its effectiveness is being undertaken.

Cis people experience dysphoria. There are medications that will cause breast development in cis males. There are hormonal conditions that will cause cis women to grow beards. Psychologists won't call the distress caused to the individual dysphoria... but that's dysphoria. It's not alien to cis people. To my mind, when these side effects happen, doctors accidently, temporarily, create a trans person. In cis men who grow breasts, they've temporarily crossed over into the experiences of trans men.

I bring that all up to ask you about hormone therapy. Just as giving cross-sex hormones to the wrong people causes suffering, denying cross-sex hormones to the right people causes the same suffering -- forcing a transgender person to undergo natural puberty is as harmful as what you are trying to protect a confused cis kid from. So where's the balance? At a utilitarian level, if hormone therapy is prescribed correctly more than half of the time, it meets the criteria for being a worthwhile treatment. We do much better than that.
 

Cis people experience dysphoria. There are medications that will cause breast development in cis males. There are hormonal conditions that will cause cis women to grow beards. Psychologists won't call the distress caused to the individual dysphoria... but that's dysphoria. It's not alien to cis people. To my mind, when these side effects happen, doctors accidently, temporarily, create a trans person. In cis men who grow breasts, they've temporarily crossed over into the experiences of trans men.

I bring that all up to ask you about hormone therapy. Just as giving cross-sex hormones to the wrong people causes suffering, denying cross-sex hormones to the right people causes the same suffering -- forcing a transgender person to undergo natural puberty is as harmful as what you are trying to protect a confused cis kid from. So where's the balance? At a utilitarian level, if hormone therapy is prescribed correctly more than half of the time, it meets the criteria for being a worthwhile treatment. We do much better than that.

Why are you bothering? Dude cited two people, both advocates against trans people and their healthcare and when pressed fell back on his "concerns" based upon his vibes, not any actual evidence.

He feels entitled to speak about our bodies, as if he has a clue as to what it's like to even undergo hrt or gender confirming care.

It's the same with all these bad faith "concerned" individuals who only seem to ever advocate against trans people and denying us what little help there is out there.

Cis people will always feel entitled to meddle in our affairs, medicalize us and then to make us jump through hoops like dogs in order to access life saving healthcare.

Dude doesn't even pretend to care about us and our lot, just another pearl clutcher uncomfortable that we (currently) are able to exert our autonomy to a limited degree
 
This is all very easily sorted out by simply calling trans women women and trans men men and not being weird about trans people and their bodies
I certainly agree with you there. It's the viable solution.
Re Emzie's post, assuming the reddit text was meant as a sarcastic joke in its totality, it still curiously bypasses the trans/not trans, which should be fine. Cissy would be funnier, though ^^
 
It's clearly a reference to Jonathan Swift's original modest proposal.
 
We could stick to the classics and call them food instead of cis.
 
We could stick to the classics and call them food instead of cis.

1679076581077.jpeg
 
No, we are not eating the eggs.
 
Back
Top Bottom