[RD] JK Rowling and Explicit Transphobia

[Kyriakos]

Just cause one is a minority, it doesn't mean it's logical to expect support from other minorities. Afaik (eg) the black minority in the US is a lot behind re accepting even homosexuality, than the white majority is. I suppose it is the same re TGism.

I think that it is very probable that in the near future TGism will be a lot more accepted. It should be seen as a positive sign that apparently the majority of "cis-people" aren't hostile to it.

By the way, anyone got reliable estimates for percentage of the population (for example, in the US) which is TG? Perhaps a very small percentage is part of why support is slower to come. I think a graph with percentages for all LGTB would be useful.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Please don't use the word "transgenderism". There is no such thing, as no one calls the phenomena of cis people (if you will) "cisgenderism", because you would get laughed at.

Furthermore, I do not believe the claim of the majority of cis people are actually accepting of trans people, as evidenced by this constant back-and-forth we're having, on a supposedly liberal and progressive ["woke"] forum. As far as acceptance goes, it is perhaps in the same disaffected way, in the abstract. What would happen, if, say, we ask cis people how they would react if someone close to them is trans? But also, so long as the acceptance remains "immaterial", e.g, not supporting trans people's struggles for healthcare, legal rights, etc - what worth is that acceptance!

I don't think that there would be any reliable estimates, considering, well, how many trans people are afraid or closeted, or the perhaps greater amount of "cis" people who actually are questioning, but are afraid of going the path of trans people for one reason or another.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

There's a difference between tolerating and accepting a group of people, @Kyriakos and unfortunately for trans people we've only recently started to be tolerated in certain places in the west.

You do not truly "accept" a group of people if you are unwilling to stick up for their rights as well, especially if they do not necessarily coinside with your own.

 

[Yeekim]

I'd rather they enter and treat the topic with a bit more decency and take into account the issues we talk about aren't merely topics of debate but real life experiences and problems.

If you enter and talk in a way that indicates you have either no skin in the game or will simply treat this as debate you're going to get people backs up when you make suggestions that fail to take into account the problems they face.

It's literally the "all people's rights matter!" argument and its facile when applied to PoCs and it's facile here.

Well, I am a white straight cis male, indeed privileged in a way that trans issues are impersonal to me.
In fact, trans issues are impersonal to overwhelming majority of people. We really don't have "skin in the game" and that is not going to change, especially if you continue to refuse framing trans rights as part of universal human rights.

That said, it is not even a debate at this point, because I've long lost track what are we actually debating over or whether there is even disagreement over some particular policy!

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Well, I am a white straight cis male, indeed privileged in a way that trans issues are impersonal to me.
In fact, trans issues are impersonal to overwhelming majority of people. We really don't have "skin in the game" and that is not going to change, especially if you continue to refuse framing trans rights as part of universal human rights.

That said, it is not even a debate at this point, because I've long lost track what are we actually debating over or whether there is even disagreement over some particular policy!

That isn't even true because the status of minority rights can be seen as an indicator of how fair a system or society is as well as how strong it is in it's treatment of the populace in general; our rights are usually the first to be eroded and removed because it's far easier to attack us than the majority.

Look at Hungary, Look at here in America or in England or Russia, trans rights are still seen as an easy target to attack and rescind and if you think they'll stop there then you're incredibly naive and sadly mistaken.

Just look at some past totalitarian governments that first tested the waters by cracking down on minorities and societaly and legally oppressed them. They did that for a reason!

 

[gay_Aleks]

I actually disagree that trans issues are irrelevant to most people. I will demonstrate: transphobia, racism and misogyny overlap in the way cis (!) Black women have been misgendered as male, due to them being perceived as "masculine". The most famous example being the conspiracy theory of Michelle Obama being Obama's secret ""husband"".

 

[Kyriakos]

Furthermore, I do not believe the claim of the majority of cis people are actually accepting of trans people, as evidenced by this constant back-and-forth we're having, on a supposedly liberal and progressive ["woke"] forum. As far as acceptance goes, it is perhaps in the same disaffected way, in the abstract. What would happen, if, say, we ask cis people how they would react if someone close to them is trans?

Well, wouldn't that depend on how much they cared about that person? Do you care about everyone, just on account of whether they are TG or not?
Most people won't care about others unless they have some reason, and certainly there are degrees of caring.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Well, wouldn't that depend on how much they cared about that person? Do you care about everyone, just on account of whether they are TG or not?
Most people won't care about others unless they have some reason, and certainly there are degrees of caring.

How would you react if you had a child and that child said they were trans? Would you support and affirm them? Deny their experiences and claim they're invalid? Ignore the topic altogether? Gaslight them into believing they are wrong?

Unfortunate as it may be, it often takes family members to be trans or gay before the general public begin to realize that we're the same as them; human beings.

 

[Kyriakos]

How would you react if you had a child and that child said they were trans? Would you support and affirm them? Deny their experiences and claim they're invalid? Ignore the topic altogether? Gaslight them into believing they are wrong?

Unfortunate as it may be, it often takes family members to be trans or gay before the general public begin to realize that we're the same as them; human beings.

The parent should have to care a lot - else they suck.
The general public, on the other hand, can accept TG without being invested.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Yes, that is what I am trying to say. There is an ocean of difference between saying, "Yes, I think trans people deserve human rights." and "I would accept my child if they're trans.". Usually, the first merely signals a certain indifference; whereas, if a child comes out to their parents as trans, there can be often very adverse reaction, even if they abstractly think that trans people are just "fine". This, of course, can go the other way! Despisal of trans people can turn into care for them once their child turns out to be trans. The point here, as always, is: Abstract thoughts do not matter if they are not backed with material action. If a parent says they like trans people, but then kick out their trans child, is there any doubt they're transphobic?

 

[Yeekim]

That isn't even true because the status of minority rights can be seen as an indicator of how fair a system or society is as well as how strong it is in it's treatment of the populace in general; our rights are usually the first to be eroded and removed because it's far easier to attack us than the majority.

Look at Hungary, Look at here in America or in England or Russia, trans rights are still seen as an easy target to attack and rescind and if you think they'll stop there then you're incredibly naive and sadly mistaken.

Just look at some past totalitarian governments that first tested the waters by cracking down on minorities and societaly and legally oppressed them. They did that for a reason!

Certainly!
Does this not translate directly into "all people's rights matter!" argument you just called facile??

 

[gay_Aleks]

It would, if it wasn't for the fact that, for the most part, such arguments have been used to silence minority struggles for rights, therefore, making it very difficult to take it in good faith.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

Certainly!
Does this not translate directly into "all people's rights matter!" argument you just called facile??

In the modern context? No, it might have in the past when there weren't specific rights that existed to support minorities.

It would, if it wasn't for the fact that, for the most part, such arguments have been used to silence minority struggles for rights, therefore, making it very difficult to take it in good faith.

Also this, I don't take some of the arguments presented in this thread as being in good faith, not least because of past interactions and from what i've read in the past.

It's very frustrating to see your community's problems waved away by an appeal to the mantra of "all people's rights matter!" when it's YOURS specifically that are being ignored, attacked, destroyed, eroded, aggressed upon, not cispeoples.

 

[Yeekim]

What specific rights do or should transpeople have that do not stem directly from UDHR?

 

[gay_Aleks]

Right to free healthcare/transition, legal protections, expansions of certain gender definitions [i.e, not limited to Male/Female] wrt ID, is one of the things I can think off the top of my head.

 

[Cloud_Strife]

What specific rights do or should transpeople have that do not stem directly from UDHR?

The right to enter into a gendered space that they are transitioning to/have transitioned to?

The right to change one's gender and have it legally accepted by the government and be treated as such?

Right to free healthcare/transition, legal protections, expansions of certain gender definitions [i.e, not limited to Male/Female] wrt ID, is one of the things I can think off the top of my head.

In America they've basically just banned transpeople from serving in the army so we can't even serve our own country now.

 

[gay_Aleks]

I will remain quiet on the pros and cons of participating in an imperialist army that serves the very oppressors of trans people.

 

[Yeekim]

The right to enter into a gendered space that they are transitioning to/have transitioned to?

The right to change one's gender and have it legally accepted by the government and be treated as such?

Would argue this stems from article 22:
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

In America they've basically just banned transpeople from serving in the army so we can't even serve our own country now.

Looks like a violation of section 2 of article 21.
Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

 

[gay_Aleks]

Article 22 is stupidly broad. We need specifics, otherwise, these rights are at the behest of whomever's ruling right now. Well, they always are, but this is seriously broad. What's needed, at the moment, is a legislation effort of some sort.

I will also remain quiet on whether the military is a "public service", and who does it really serve, as that's probably outside of the topic at hand.

 

[NinjaCow64]

@Yeekim May I refer you to a post I posted earlier in this thread?

I know that this is getting awfully close to arguments we’ve gone over before but transpeople aren’t an arbitrary subgroup. They are not arbitrary because 1) they are currently and historically have been the targets of a very powerful ideology that has many very powerful people in its number and 2) transpeople require access to things that cispeople would be unlikely to use (e.g ability to legally change their gender with minimal legal BS) in order for their fundamental rights to be preserved.

To use another example, everyone should have the right to be able to access public buildings. However, if all government buildings in a country were only accessible by stairs in a given country then people who could not walk up stairs (generally the elderly and the disabled) then that would discriminate against them. Laws should be written to ensure all public buildings have ramps so people who can’t use stairs access them and in many countries such as this. These laws are designed with certain (not arbitrary) subgroups of the population in mind (the elderly and the disabled).

Legally changing one’s gender will be only ever relevant to trans people and intersex people. In most countries the process for changing one’s gender is extremely and unnecessarily difficult. In many countries it requires months of getting approval from various doctors and psychologists and then having to live as one’s preferred gender for a matter of years (all while having to face the embarrassment and danger that one would experience from having ID that does not match the gender that one is presenting as). Some countries require people to have to have surgery that they may not otherwise want to have in order legally change their gender. And countries that don’t have same sex marriage they require people to get divorced before they can transition, even if both people in the relationship would rather stay married. Some countries (including the UK where this debate was squashed thanks to the effort of people like JKR) there are proposals to move to a system where people can change their gender if they can legally prove that they fully understand the implications of doing so (by being of sound mind and making a sworn declaration to a judge). Solving these issues will require legislation written that address issues unique to the trans community.

Sometimes to protect everyone’s rights, legislation needs to be crafted to specifically protect significant (not arbitrary) subsets of people who have a higher likelihood of having their rights infringed.

To elaborate further - the framing of your question is flawed. Its not "What specific rights do or should transpeople have that cis people don't?" its "What measures need to be taken to by society to protect trans rights?". Because transpeople need specific legal mechanisms and protections to ensure that their rights are upheld, just like how people who can't use stairs need ramps in order to access public buildings.

I'm not super well versed in the UDHR but I think that what most people are talking about in the thread falls under "right to dignity".