0
0

Can we talk about other identities? (self.ainbow)

kabukistar が 投稿

In the fallout of the whole Rachel Dolezal thing, I noticed people on the internet comparing her to Caitlyn Jenner. In response to that, there were a lot of people replying that there is absolutely no comparison, because Rachel Dolezal is crazy, or she's trying to invade black spaces, or she's lying about who she is, and they're glad she got fired after being outed. Just basically, the exact same kind of rhetoric that's lobbed at trans people. It really disheartens me to see trans people and allies just turning around and lobbing the kind of hate at someone for identifying as something that's less approved by society.

It's not just Dolezal, though. I've noticed this for a long time. People will totally get it and respect your identity if it's "male" or "female", but as soon as they hear someone identifies as something else, all that compassion and respect for every person's right to determine their own identity, all of it just dries up. This goes for groups like otherkin or third gender too.

I'm just sick of this idea that people seem to operate on that supporting trans rights rights requires also hating on any identity that isn't male or female, or somewhere on a straight line between them. That it requires not only building a wall between identifying as female or male and identifying as anything else, but then also shoveling as much shit as possible over that wall. I'm just tired of it and needed to say something.

全 21 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]materhern 8ポイント9ポイント  (3子コメント)

Because skin color isn't an identity. Its a false social structure we created in this world by making skin color a status symbol. She is female, period. Not a "black female" or a "white female". Biologically that doesn't make a difference at all. In transgender person there is a disconnect between the mind and the physical body that is able to be defined. Males and females are biologically different.

There isn't a biological difference between a black woman and a white woman. There is a difference of melanin in their skin. She changed her's in order to get the benefits that are reserve for people who historically are under privileged in this country. A privileged white girl deliberately changed herself to get assistance allotted for people who are actually underprivileged due to assholes who judge people by skin color.

I'm not hating on identity. But what she did, and the benefit she gained by doing it, was flat out deliberately dishonest.

Her brother said in an interview that she asked him not to out her or blow her cover. She drafted a new black family to pretend to be from a black family so people would believe she was black.

Its one thing to say you identify as something other than you were born as. Its another thing entirely to lie about you entire past to make it look like you are something you weren't.

[–]kabukistar[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Because skin color isn't an identity.

Clearly, for her, it is. Or rather, ethnic identity is an identity. Since she identifies as African American, not #A0522D.

Its one thing to say you identify as something other than you were born as. Its another thing entirely to lie about you entire past to make it look like you are something you weren't.

See, it's that kind of thing. Just assuming that someone's identity is a lie. It's the exact kind of rhetoric that we would recognize for the vile hate that it is, if it was said about someone's identity that's "male" or "female", but as soon as someone identifies as something else, then people (even people in /r/ainbow) are happy to spew hate at them.

[–]materhern 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

No, her antics show a consistent desire to create a life that didn't exist, including lying about her past, her up bringing, and even who her parents were. This wasn't an identity thing. If was a calculated con, complete with fake back ground and fake paper work. That's why she told her brother not to blow her cover and not" I identify as black" until she was caught. Conwoman is playing on lgbt sympathies to avoid the consequences of lying to take advantage of resources specifically set aside for under privileged minorities. And no matter what she says, she was never an under privileged minority and should not have been taking those resources

[–]kabukistar[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If she was outed, she would receive immense amounts of hate and ridicule and lose her livelihood. It would be unreasonable to expect her to just go around declaring herself to have white parents.

If we lived in a society that treated transgender people as poorly as it did transethnic people, you could expect a lot of trans people to have to alter details about their past life in order to avoid being outed too.

Besides, there's no privilege to being black in America. Usually cons have some kind of monetary benefit to them.

[–]cbrachyrhynchos 6ポイント7ポイント  (16子コメント)

The reason why we "respect" gender and sexual identity (except for people who don't ) is because acceptance is the last option left. For over a century, our culture tried to change gender and sexual orientation, often with the full force of criminal law and the medical establishment. Those efforts were generally horrific failures worse than non-intervention. But, some groups keep trying to fix us.

Skepticism that otherkin or "transracial" identity operates on the same level shouldn't be considered "hate" either.

[–]alternativeleanings 1ポイント2ポイント  (15子コメント)

Well then the question is why are we so sceptical and dismissive of it?

[–]Discord_DancingHaute Mess 4ポイント5ポイント  (13子コメント)

Because trans* people and sexual minorities have their existences backed up by science and are biologically based, while otherkin/transethnic people do not.

[–]kabukistar[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (12子コメント)

Transethnic and otherkin people are a much smaller minority, and a more marginalized group in society.

There's been no research to support a biological basis for their identity, but that's not because there's been research that proves there is no biological basis; it's because nobody has devoted the resources to doing research in the first place.

And even if they did research and found no biological basis, so what? My gender identity is given validity by me and my identifying in it, not by a scientist saying that it's biologically determined. This isn't about science; it's about treating human beings with dignity and respecting their identities.

[–]Discord_DancingHaute Mess 1ポイント2ポイント  (11子コメント)

My gender identity is given validity by me and my identifying in it

Anyone is free to identify as whatever they want, but if it's not based in any form of tangible reality then no one should be concerned with pandering to the delusions of attention seeking snowflakes.

There is no meaningful biological difference between the races, thus having any innate "transness" pertaining to skin color is not based in reality.

Otherkin is just a fucking joke and I refuse to even justify why I think such.

a more marginalized group in society.

Playing the Oppression OlympicsTM because you feel like a turtle on the inside isn't going to fly here, or anywhere.

[–]kabukistar[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (10子コメント)

Anyone is free to identify as whatever they want, but if it's not based in any form of tangible reality then no one should be concerned with pandering to the delusions of attention seeking snowflakes.

There is no meaningful biological difference between the races, thus having any innate "transness" pertaining to skin color is not based in reality.

So, in your opinion, if there wasn't any scientific evidence to support transgenderism as being biologically-based, then it would be totally fine to just ignore trans people's identities and treat them like a joke?

Playing the Oppression OlympicsTM because you feel like a turtle on the inside isn't going to fly here, or anywhere.

I'm not playing the "oppression olympics". I'm explaining to you why there has been no scientific evidence to support transethnicity as being biologically rooted.

[–]Discord_DancingHaute Mess 1ポイント2ポイント  (9子コメント)

if there wasn't any scientific evidence to support transgenderism as being biologically-based, then it would be totally fine to just ignore trans people's identities and treat them like a joke?

There is no if about it though. We are not discussing alternative universes, we are discussing this reality in this time and place.

I'm explaining to you why there has been no scientific evidence to support transethnicity as being biologically rooted.

The reason there is no scientific evidence (or inquiry) that transethnicity is rooted in biology is because there is no meaningful biological difference between the races.

There does not need to be any scientific investigation as to whether or not a person can "feel" like a different race because for all intents and purposes there is no difference in the first place to investigate on a genetic, or physiological level.

Saying that you "feel" black is about as meaningful as saying that you "feel" like a person with a roman nose, or "feel" like a person with red hair. The genetic/physiological differences between a person with white skin, and a person with black skin (or any skin color) are that minute.

If you want to identify as a member of specific cultural groups that happen to be populated largely by a specific ethnicity, go ahead, but saying you're "transethnic" because you're skin is "the wrong color," is entirely meaningless.

[–]kabukistar[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (8子コメント)

There is no if about it though. We are not discussing alternative universes, we are discussing this reality in this time and place.

Try to look beyond the here and now. There was a time, in the past, when there had not been a study to determine that being transgender had any biological determinant, and there were a lot of people who hated others for being trans. As far as they knew, there was no biological cause to transgenderism, and they decided to take that lack of knowledge and hate trans people with it? Were they right to do so?

You're in the same position now with transethnicism. You're saying that transethnic people's identities are a joke, because there hasn't been any study yet to show that there's a biological cause.

Saying that you "feel" black is about as meaningful as saying that you "feel" like a person with a roman nose, or "feel" like a person with red hair. The genetic/physiological differences between a person with white skin, and a person with black skin (or any skin color) are that minute.

It's not we've completely mapped the human brain and tested out every possible metric in it. Just because we haven't found any differences doesn't mean we wont.

I mean, it wasn't until within the last century that we found that there were any differences with gender in the physical brain.

If you want to identify as a member of specific cultural groups that happen to be populated largely by a specific ethnicity, go ahead, but saying you're "transethnic" because you're skin is "the wrong color," is entirely meaningless.

Why? Why is it meaningless? Because you think that identity is only made valid if science backs it up?

[–]Discord_DancingHaute Mess 1ポイント2ポイント  (7子コメント)

There was a time, in the past, when there had not been a study to determine that being transgender had any biological determinant, and there were a lot of people who hated others for being trans. As far as they knew, there was no biological cause to transgenderism

There was certaintly a "biological cause" for transgenderism "in the past," and the assumption was mental illness, something a member of the GSM community should know. Transgenderism has always been a tangible concept that implied specific behaviors and desires, such as presenting as the "opposite" gender as ones assigned sex, and wanting their body to reflect that on a physical level beyond clothing and other culturally gendered mannerisms.

There is no history of transethnicism. As you should know, the entire concept of race is only a few hundred years old itself. Race as we know it today is entirely socially constructed, which is another reason transethnicity is not based in biological reality.

It's not we've completely mapped the human brain and tested out every possible metric in it. Just because we haven't found any differences doesn't mean we wont.

And what exactly do you think we'd find? What exactly makes a person a specific race beyond the color of their skin? Are you implying that specific races have specific racially-determined feelings or behaviors?

[–]kabukistar[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (6子コメント)

There was certaintly a "biological cause" for transgenderism "in the past," and the assumption was mental illness, something someone a member of the GSM community should know. Transgenderism has always been a tangible concept that implied specific behaviors and desires, such as presenting as the "opposite" gender as ones assigned sex, and wanting their body to reflect that on a physical level beyond clothing and other culturally gendered mannerisms.

So, are you saying that we should respect someone's identity if we think them identifying as it is a mental illness? I'm not quire sure what you're getting at here.

You seem to be just making excuses to dodge the question. In the past, there was no evidence that there was a neurological cause for transgenderism. Was it fine for people to hate and disrespect and discriminate against trans people when that evidence didn't exist?

And what exactly do you think we'd find? What exactly makes a person a specific race beyond the color of their skin? Are you implying that specific races have specific racially-determined feelings or behaviors?

I'm saying that we've found different neurological metrics that correlate with gender identity. We may also find that there are different neurological metrics that correlate with ethnic identity.

[–]cbrachyrhynchos 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, we know that Dolezal lied or was misleading about some parts of her past, so that's something which contributes to a lot of mistrust.

But there's also been a fair bit of study on "passing" and cross-cultural participation over the last century, with a big flurry of work before WWII as part of the Harlem Renaissance. So we have a history of PoC who passed for white, and white people who successfully integrated into black communities. This generally hasn't been analogous to the issues of sexual orientation or gender identity where being in the closet comes with extraordinary health risks.

With respect to otherkin, again we have a long, cross-cultural history of LGBT people. While I'm somewhat open to the idea of otherkin as a religious or spiritual expression of animism, I don't think it's the same thing as transgender (which for the record, included nonbinary, third-gender, and agender in my opinion.)