It completely changes the tone of the question. Without it, the question is more "how do I deal with people who misgender me personally" rather than "how do you view people who misgender you?". Completely different question and it's disingenuous to call me out for commenting on people's intentions when that was the question in itself.
As I've stated, I didn't see it as being a necessary qualifier for the question. I didn't omit it for any nefarious reason, I was just trying to keep an already long quote as concise as I could. To be fair most people would have just quoted your response and not even re-quoted the original question at all and I'm sure you would have found that acceptable, I just put it in because I thought it would be helpful. Also, not quoting the full thing does not mean I didn't read it or that other people didn't read it or couldn't find it a few posts above. Once again, there was no intention to misrepresent anything here.
Because most people aren't consciously transphobic/homophobic/racist etc, either because they don't care enough to go to outspoken bigot levels, or they don't realize they hold bigoted views, or they don't think there is a problem with having bigoted views if they aren't literally KKK or other hate groups. Because of that, people can harbor some really terrible views without nessecairly realizing anything is wrong, or not caring that they're wrong.
I'm not saying this can't be that case, it just seemed from what you wrote that you considered it to be universally the case and I didn't follow that reasoning. If you weren't saying that then so be it.
I mean, think about the own language that you used in your first post. You literally said transgender people can never be more than a crude approximation of the gender they identify as. Firstly, would you ever call someone a crude approximation of /anything/ unless you were trying to pick a fight with them? That's just a straight up insult, no matter how you try to spin it. But beyond that, you are basicilly saying I'll never be female. You are, even if you don't realize you are, denying me of my womanhood with that comment, by saying that I'm only a crude approximation of one. Think about it, if I'm a crude approximation of a woman, then what the hell am I actually? If I can't achieve being a woman, the only logical other awnser is....
What I said, as I explained, was simply my assessment of what I see as actually possible to achieve in the present day with the current state of technology, know-how or whatever else. There is absolutely no moral judgement involved at all, and certainly not of you personally or anyone who chooses to undergo transition as it is currently possible. Indeed I hope it becomes possible to do MORE in the future, just as it currently is possible to do a lot more than was possible in the past. Just because I don't actually see your end goal as being something that is technically achievable doesn't mean I don't want it to be possible, or would want to stop you striving for it, or even being entirely satisfied by what you can achieve. I'm not trying to deny you anything at all.
Now do you see the issue? You misgendered me, despite saying you wouldn't without realizing that you did.
Well... no. I was perfectly well aware of everything that I said. I said I would address you as a woman, treat you as a woman etc in normal every day life, but it's not possible for me to address the topic at hand in the same way.
Oh hell no.
You do
not get to do drive by pot shots at me and my identity and then say "respect my intolerance". You either put up or shut up. Because at the end of the day, if you can't defend why I'm not a woman, then it probably means I am, in fact, one
I'm not taking drive by pot shots at all, I'm just responding to what you said. Someone asked what you thought about people who do not consider you to be "truly" female (and yes I'm probably misquoting again, but you get the gist) and your answer suggested that you can only conceive of this being the case for people who consider you "icky". As someone who thinks the former, but certainly does not feel the latter AT ALL I thought I would try and convey that point of view. If you still want to insist that it is intolerance on my part then so be it. All I can do is point out that only one of us is being aggressive and only one of us is trying to insist that the other sees things the same way. The topic was raised and you said some things I didn't agree were universally true so I thought I would share my own views as it seemed relevant. If you want to see someone who's expressed support for you but who just doesn't share EVERY one of your beliefs as being intolerant of you then so be it I guess.
Again, our choice in different faiths /do not impact each other/. and you know why it doesn't? Because we can respect each other's viewpoints as being valid, even if I don't nessecairly agree or even like them.
I respect your viewpoint as being valid. I never said anything to the contrary and I believe I've said quite a lot that would indicate that to be the case. I also, despite not sharing it, do not DISLIKE your viewpoint at all. Can you say the same two things of me? So which one of us is being intolerant?
Your decision to consider me not a real woman impacts me because you are saying my viewpoint of myself is fundamentally not valid. You are in effect saying I'm wrong about myself.
No I'm not, I'm merely stating my own opinion, which is one voice out of several billion. I'm not saying your own viewpoint is invalid, fundamentally or otherwise, or that I think my own personal viewpoint should affect you in the slightest. As I said, the only reason I said anything was because you were saying that anyone who thinks as I do must consider you "icky", which I don't at all and wanted to express as much.
Your religion analogy does not work because I'm not saying their religion is wrong, but that I have my own, different one, and we can all be cool praying or not praying to whatever deities we do or do not believe in.
I think this is just semantics. If you have your own religion (or none) then you must, by definition, consider their beliefs to be wrong. But this doesn't mean "wrong" in any moral sense and clearly doesn't stop you getting along with them. In fact you probably never even talk about it. But I'm pretty sure if any one of your friends directly challenged you to state if you believed in their God you would have to tell them you didn't.
No, it's not possible, because not considering people the gender that they identify as is ill will in itself. It's downright malicious.
Well I apologise for disagreeing but I know for a fact that this is possible and I disagree with the rest of the statement as well. I bare you absolutely no ill will and am not being malicious. I wish you a good day and a happy life. Peace, out, etc.
Thats the thing. Most people don't support murder and discrimination. Some will even condemn it. But what they won't do, is condemn the societal institutions which allowed those actions to exist in the first place because that forces them to admit they're part of the problem. And no one likes admitting they are.
I just don't have much time for this sort of reasoning, sorry.
Did you even google what a microagression was? Because microagression is basicilly the phenonoem I'm describing (although I dislike the term myself so I don't use it)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microaggression_theory
Its thrown around too liberally nowadays, but in this case it's a perfect match.
No. Again, I don't have much time for this sort of thing. If you wish to categorise someone expressing a worldview that doesn't 100% agree with yours (whilst simultaneously continually expressing support for you) as aggression, micro or otherwise, then that's your choice.
But the real part which makes me curious : why do you feel that the opinion of someone else about your gender does invalidate yourself ?
I mean, I can totally understand that it's a very sensitive subject, from which a lot of pain comes and that validation by others is pretty important, so I get the "it hurts" part, and the "religion is about what you believe about the universe, but my gender is about ME". It's more about the intellectual aspect which I wonder about
(Quoting Akka but still addressing Omega124)
I also entirely acknowledge that this is all a sensitive topic of discussion for you and had no intention to cause distress, but the fact that you started a discussion thread about the topic in general and the way you seemed open to discussing this particular topic when Akka asked about it led me to believe it was worth a stab at talking about it. Unfortunately it seems to have become the predicted crap fest so I'll probably leave it at that (unless any of the usual suspects feel like continuing to misrepresent what I've actually said in which case I'll no doubt respond to them).
