311–320 of 505 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elton John was notable as Reginald Kenneth Dwight?
The notability requirement is specifically for transgender and non-binary individuals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They targeted a public person who exists at the upper echelons of power and privilege. For a group of people so obsessed with comedy only “punching up” it’s ironic to see the justification.
Did they target her or did they target the idea of being trans? > where he serves proudly as the first man in that position to dress like a western cultural stereotype of a woman > We have still chosen to give the award as his self-identification has no bearing on the truth If you attack a successful member of a minority group based on their minority you still aren't punching up, sorry.
Her.
Great, they should have never been banned to begin with.
The right of free speech doesn't apply to a private company. A company has every right to dictate what services it will provide and the conditions for using those services. It is not a public communications carrier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not "absolutely true in the scientific sense", except at the "I have an understanding of high school level biology and sociology" sense. Sex and gender are both significantly more complex than just chromosomes, genitalia, or organs. If you are interested, I'm happy to dive into a good faith discussion of where the science actually falls.
Matter of opinion. I wouldn't deliberately misgender someone just to be a jerk, but the idea suite you're referencing was a niche viewpoint 7 years ago or so. It's kind of incredible to go from there to "this is a settled mandatory philosophical viewpoint and disagreement is banished" in such a short time.
We used to think that being gay was a mental disease. We now recognize it as something that many animals have as a part of their population, including humans. 20 years ago, being gay was like, pretty much not accepted in public and the science was developing.
Trans identities are coming a bit later, but we're still learning and developing our models.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Communicating your stigmas is optional, and rarely does anyone with institutional power demonize you or even attempt to de-facto ban you from public life for it. I am extremely obviously trans, I can't opt out of being beaten up because some conservative talking head said people like me are all pedophiles. And if the GOP had their way I'd be illegal anywhere a 10 year old could be as "inherently sexual".
It is not optional. I have to out myself as well. Any time I start getting in a serious relationship with someone I have to sit them down to have "the talk" about me being a recovering alcoholic and bipolar. It's usually a relationship killer. Let's be honest, you have a better chance of finding love than I do. I've been single for 10 years. Look, I don't want to fight. I just want to use humor to ease my pain. Humor…
But as I already said, these are meant to tease your disgust reflex more than provoke laughter.
I'd recommend looking up some trans comedians. Not that I think you need to be trans to make jokes about us, but it certainly seems to help go beyond the typical "X identifies as Y" one joke format that is so prevalent in conservative comedy and certainly the Babylon Bee that collecting permutations of it has its own subreddit.[1]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Truth and satire are intertwined in a special way that makes satire be so powerful. Also Babylon Bee said they were satirizing USA Today as listing her as a top woman of the year.
They did it because of her accomplishments, not for being a transgender woman. There is an important difference. I understand the satire on some level, she was a man, she only transitioned later in her life, so of course there is always a question of whether you have to be born a woman to be a woman, did these people born into the wrong body, can someone be a woman if you find her look uncanny and so on. There is a l…
Whereas it would be perfectly appropriate to give such an award to a woman who transitioned earlier and would have faced similar difficulties in career progression as cis women.
ETA: This also differs by generation. Levine and Jenner's generation denied a lot of opportunities to AFAB people. Excluding cis women who are now in their 60s from science growing up and then celebrating woman scientists who were only/partially allowed the career because they were in the closet is...odd.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If someone legally changes their name, that would indicate to me that the subject wishes to be known by the new name. Yet Wikipedia will still list the birth name.
People change their names all the time when they get married or immigrate and have no problem with their birth name's being available. I don't think it's fair to make a blanket statement about this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Matter of opinion. I wouldn't deliberately misgender someone just to be a jerk, but the idea suite you're referencing was a niche viewpoint 7 years ago or so. It's kind of incredible to go from there to "this is a settled mandatory philosophical viewpoint and disagreement is banished" in such a short time.
If it was a niche viewpoint 7 years ago (which I would quibble with, given third gender and trans people have existed for millennia across many cultures, just not commonly in modern America), then great, we've seen science advance. We used to think that being gay was a mental disease. We now recognize it as something that many animals have as a part of their population, including humans. 20 years ago, being gay was l…
It's massively overstating things to call it "settled science" or even "science" at this point. It's philosophy in theory and public opinion in practice.
Science: this phenomenon exists and people exist who've had these experiences. That's a factual statement.
Politics: you must talk and think about the phenomenon in these proscribed ways. That's an ideological statement.