Is Transgenderism a contradictory mess? It calls for the abolition of gender but it also reifies gender norms. wtf?!?!...

Because it's recognized by the WHO and the DSMV and all international equivalents, and the price to being transgender isn't free attention. Usually it's an increased likelihood for domestic abuse, suicide, rape, or murder. But most of all? Poverty and terminal lack of employment, and so no income. Fear of being in public makes them turn inwards and hate themselves for what they are and who they wish to be, which results overwhelmingly in eventual suicide.

Do people beg for attention? Sure, but I really suggest you read the medical literature on a medical problem before you decide you know better than organizations of mental health professionals who's job it is to address the public safety of "confused" people.

This doesn't just go for transgender people, this goes for mentally ill people at large. You cannot address this problem by calling people confused or ill, that is the problem, you are not solving the material conditions of mentally ill people by chastising them for their condition in life.

Call it Reddit, but I fail to see what the millionth thread about this accomplishes. Nobody leaves with an answer that solves the problem.

Transgender stuff is, and has always been, basically a non-issue to me. When I was a kid here, gay men were more demonized. A girl who used to be a guy? It's a Cinderella story, it made sense to kids where I was. A guy who wants to touch other guys? That's a bit creepy.

The whole thing got a whole lot more retarded circa Kylie "the Steamroller" Jenner. It became the new frontier, and a source of more bullshit identity antagonism. Meanwhile, sex changes have been legal in America for longer than buttsex has. Post-op marriages, too. I'm not saying they don't face issues - that's stupid, of course they fucking do… but they also solved a lot of their actual entrenched legal issues decades before fags did, and yet here we were with this oppression olympics bullshit and this false gay-trans antagonism based on stuff fucking Milo (the Catholic anti-gay marriage guy) of all people said.

And of course, paired with this renewed bathroom moral panic… it's honestly baffling how America has this many sandheaded fucktards. There was a world famous American trans woman in the '50s. Louis Farrakhan wrote a song about her when he was a fucking Calypso singer. Then right before shit hit the fan, Andrej Pejic comes out as trans - and he'd (former he'd) been one of the biggest models in the world. Even if they missed that, there were a few thousand episodes of Jerry Springer (ok, not the best portrayal) and a "Pork Soda" lyric to introduce the fucking concept. It astounds.

I don't believe most people who say they are "non-binary" or something of that nature want to actively deviate from the norm. Reactionaries would make the claim that these "non-binary" people are really just attention-seeking teenagers. I can't comment on that.

You are definitely right about the fact that they are a tiny percentage of the population. The entire LGBT community is a minority, the T standing for Transgender is a minority in a minority and "non-binary" is a minority within a minority within a minority.

It can't hurt for a tiny amount of people to ask that they be called specific pronouns. Of course, I don't believe the usage of specific pronouns should be mandated (read: required by law) by the government and is the only thing I really agree with Jordan Peterson on. Even reactionaries are right twice a day (i.e a broken clock).

It wouldn't be a gender. A gender is a way of being prescribed by society, in society today that's capitalist society.

On this though, isn't transgenderism ONLY compatible with believing in gender at all? I mean, if materially your sex is male, then aren't all your doing when you "identify" as female is assuming what being a female is like despite never being one? Are you not constructing a perception of what "being female" is (a gender) and then saying you are that thing? If so, then the only way I could see such a thing even remotely making sense would be if gender actually observably existed (as in, these qualities are "female" and these ones "male" and we can show them to be so). If a male who identifies as a male acts in the exact same manner as someone who "identifies" as a female, is his gender now female? All I'm getting from this is that gender doesn't exist.

Just read what the WHO and the DSMV and shit have to say it's really not that complicated. People can make it a fucking philosophical issue, but the real problem here is how Capitalism does not give a fuck about the mentally ill, it never has, and we should be above pointing the finger and going

"haha look at the doomed person"

I asked what the benefit of a third gender would be but this:

Doesn't answer my question. What you say here, however, is from my understanding generally accepted to be true:

But this just sort of goes back to my question. How would simply embracing a third gender fix this? You say:

"Confused" and "ill" are different things. People with PTSD have surely been helped but PTSD is considered a problem. I'm not saying a transgender person has a mental disorder because I don't know enough about it, but again, you didn't answer my question.

dude, I had a legitimate question. I never once called transgender people confused. If you can't provide me with any enlightening answers AND you're going to become emotionally charged about it AND you're going to mischaracterize what I'm saying then just don't respond to me. I'm genuinely curious about this stuff

Maybe it's the fault of people in those threads who refuse to have a discussion and instead derail the conversation? Maybe?

Well, of course it doesn't. Capitalism doesn't really give a fuck about anybody unless a profit can be yielded from it, and the mentally I'll are usually until its not a net loss. I'm more discussing transgenderism in a philosophical manner, yes, but of course I want to end capitalism. I wouldn't be on this board otherwise though I know that doesn't always apply to everyone here.

God dam it

Tbh, we should accept a third gender. Those born intersex, because it actually reflects their sex. They often get assigned genders at birth, and this can be harmful, and they're such a small group that transgender people often adopt the term on the basis of being "brain intersex" or some semantic bullshit like that.

Pseudo-hermaphrodites deserve their own gender option.

I'm saying that people would benefit from reading on the medical issues they don't understand and find a way to help these people. Not asking why, how, or what. Understanding the medical reasons why this phenomenon occurs and work from there. Come up with new ideas.

We can't just constantly shit on the mentally ill, as Reddit as it sounds I don't care. They're more likely to be homeless, suicidal, engage in dangerous behavior towards themselves because of the pressure Capital puts on them, more than most.

We need to find a way to constructively solve this problem instead of constantly asking "why". Sometimes the mind just doesn't make sense and asking why is fruitless. The phenomenon happens to vulnerable poor people, not just in America, but in the Third World. And their outcomes are equally bleak.

This goes beyond trangender people, the stigma around mental illness is entirely because of their uselessness in capital as it stands. We must find a way to work around that. And I've yet to see it, beyond endless questioning.

A century ago people died for having schizophrenia and living a life of unemployment and poverty, and a century later they do still.

Calling them lumpen won't solve the problem,

Thanks for actually responding to me as if I was posing a serious question instead of trying to talk shit about trans people lol. Because I'm curious about this stuff.
However, I never implied that non-binary folks were attention-seekers. Nor did I say that they WANT to deviate from the norm. They just SEEM to deviate from the norm, and the reasons why they deviate are not understood, from what I know. It could be entirely biological, or it could be psychological. It just seems really bizarre to me to know that there are these tiny deviations from the norm and to pronounce that they are there own gender. And I know that's stupid, but I really would like some clarification on WHY that counts as a gender.

Unless we want more pauper's graves in the hopeless future I suggest we don't further demonize the people the most vulnerable in the future.

But in your example there isn't need for a third gender. The intersex child has simply been ascribed the WRONG one. Still two genders, no?

The wrong one is either one.

There are people who identify purely as intersex, who've tried to get it as an option. It reflects their default physical state. By and large, it's not an issue of "born with pseudo-hermaphroditic genitalia, and raised a girl but want to be a boy." It's "leave our genitalia alone and recognize that we aren't necessarily one-or-the-other." And it's something which is consistently glossed over by the current strain of gender politics.

isna.org/faq/what_is_intersex

Ohhhh. Yeah. I agree 100% with for sure. But that's the thing. Let's say we find out transgenderism is a result of like a vitamin deficiency (just as an example). Having labeled that as a third gender would have been really premature. That's what I'm confused by. How is it helpful to ascribe the label of "third gender" to something we don't understand

Agreed.

What I'm asking "why" about is a proposed "solution," tho. I see it as premature kind of, and I don't see how it IS a third gender or how it clarifies anything to consider it such

Ohhhh, I see what you mean sort of. I was confused by your example. My fault, not yours.

My understanding was that intersex people almost always identify as a gender which was the opposite of their ascribed gender at birth. I remember learning a bit about that in a psych class and that's what I remember.
In a way this example makes more sense to me, because there is a biological reality that you can identify, which is different than the non-binary gender-fluid people which seems arbitrary.

This, it'd be like saying "wtf how can you be an anarcho-communist if communism = stalin?"

What a crock of shit. They arguably reinforce these norms more than anybody else. The very act of saying "I can't be a man because I don't measure up to , so I must be a woman" solidifies the myth of gender. It's also why every MtT wants to be Daria, or an anime girl, or a 50s housewife, and why every FtT is a undercut-bearing steroidus maximus epic bacon whiskey bro named "Grayson." They love the minstrel show performance of gender.

"TERFs" are the opposite of gender essentialists.

They get the wall.

im cool with trans people

Best of both worlds imho

Gender identity =/= gender roles
Gender roles are the social norms that men and women are generally expected to conform to, and are largely a social construct, as demonstrated by how wildly they vary between different locations, time periods, and classes.
Gender identity is thought to be based in one's neurological structure and therefore isn't a social construct. The general idea behind transsexualism is that in rare cases some sexually dimorphic parts of the brain can develop as the opposite sex, which results in a feeling of intense discomfort with one's body, its not something that would just go away even if gender roles were reversed or completely gone.
Admittedly, the trans "community" is a fucking trainwreck for the most part and there are a lot of trans people who DO end up reinforcing stereotypical gender norms, but that's hardly something limited to trannies- most normal men and women go along with the social pressures to conform too, after all.

What I don't really understand personally is the whole "nonbinary" thing, so if there's anyone here who considers themselves as such I'd love to hear an explanation of it. Considering that transsexualism is based on the idea of someone's brain developing as the opposite sex I guess it seems possible that the same thing could happen but leaving someone kind of "in-between", and I've seen a small number of nonbinary folks who expressed a similar feeling of discomfort with their bodies so that seems legit, but they seem to be in the minority. The overwhelming majority of the nonbinary people I see online only seem to identify as such as a way of distancing themselves from gender roles- "I'm biologically female but I like all these stereotypically masculine things so I'm nonbinary", etc., which only seems to reinforce gender essentialist views, imo (which is kind of ironic since many of them are the same people who claim they want to "abolish gender"). I mean, being a qt trap or buff butch chick doesn't automatically make someone trans or nonbinary just because they don't conform to stereotypical gender roles.

ThatsNotHowItWorksYouLittleShit.png

Well… why not? Genders are social constructs, it doesn't really cost us anything to make up a new one. It's not like there is some transcendental truth involved anyway, gender is a whole lot of spookery if you take a broad view and compare how different cultures deal with it. If people ask for a third gender, give them what they want, likely it won't hurt. Let them put "x" in stead of "m" or "f" on their ID's. And if we start seeing ill effects, though I can't see what those would be, you can always abolish the new gender again.