This isn’t an entirely psychological discussion. It was never strictly that. No one has to be God to know what sex someone is. This isn’t a rare case of some medical condition. He’s certainly not a female if he’s a TW. And according to your group AFABs can’t be TW. So that only leaves male.
It also hasn’t “always been referred to as gender violence” as gender wasn’t really coined and used until John Money in 1955. On top of that, it’s intellectually dishonest to pretend that they were talking about males with dysphoria. That wasn’t widely accepted as a concept until more recent years and they didn’t start recording them as the wrong sex until recent years. Even when they say the term “gender” they put “female or male” as options. People still use it interchangeably. On top of that recording it by gender is harmful because as I already linked above, they retain the same criminal patterns (as in the commit the same types of crimes) as their birth sex. Which means they would also have to be referring to statistics on violence, based on sex. It also doesn’t help that the movement you’re supporting demands separation on the concepts of sex and gender, and you acknowledging this as male on female, which are sexes.
“Turned it into something about comfort” you literally referred to comfort. Not conversational safety which they have. You said: “Ffs, maybe you should have considered that, maybe, perhaps, trans users would only feel comfortable joining the discussion…” so maybe instead of telling me to do research you should be careful about the way you word things. They also aren’t afraid of me. They’re mostly males, and males aren’t marginalized for being male. They’re getting the laws they want, they’re getting to use women’s spaces and resources despite our objections, they’re getting documents at workplaces changed to suit their language, people in high up political positions are kissing their asses. No other movement has gotten that far, that fast. And it has to do with them being male. I’m half black, I experience SSA, I’m a woman. I know what being marginalized is like thanks.
I’m sorry are you trying to compare abuse to gender? I know you probably think this is some gotcha moment because “well this concept is societally made up so is gender so that means you have to believe in all concepts or none”. I have continuously referred to the “material reality of sex” specifically to the point where me saying “material reality” contextually means the same thing. You know I’m speaking about that when I say only “material reality” based on context. I believe in things that aren’t there before my eyes. This isn’t one of them.
You know what else is a social construct? Cultural construct? Religion. And yet you (probably) don’t expect everyone to believe in religion. Ghosts and spirits are a cultural and social constructs, and yet you don’t expect people to believe in that. Souls, same thing is applicable. And yet, maybe not you since you don’t believe in them, but a good portion of the gender movement believes in a gendered soul. Why would they expect someone to believe them if they didn’t believe in souls. You don’t believe in souls but it’s also a cultural/societal construct just as much as gender. Maybe then they could fall back on “brain sex” but as stated that’s been debunked and not only that, is sexist as the very basis of denying women a lot of their rights was based on them believing our brains were sexed. Even if it were they would still be in a male body (when talking about TIMs). Their chromosomes, skeletal structure, muscle mass, natural hormone levels. And don’t think about using people with DSD as a pawn. They already get enough from that medical condition without you claiming them to benefit your movement. You also claim that “material reality is all you believe in” before mentioning your lack of belief in souls, however acknowledge gender as a social construct, and that you believe in it. That’s contradictory. So no, material reality isn’t all you believe in.
Here’s the problem with gender. It’s oppressive stereotypes. Gender is femininity and masculinity. Femininity is pushed upon women, masculinity upon males. It’s constrictive. Women have fought for decades to be allowed to break out of that bubble and now when they’re GNC they’re not only assumed to be TIFs but it’e pushed upon them. Butches and tomboys cannot exist peacefully without having this ideology thrust upon them. I’m not a “reductionist”. Gender ideologues are since they will see “x form of dress and x behavior means you’re in the wrong body.” What’s reductionist is saying the complexities of womanhood can be understood and achieved with hormones, surgery, and conforming to a list of behaviors. I also never said TIMs were “evil” and “pathologically entitled” (though a study show that 81.4% of people with GD have a comorbidity with personality disorders. Of 81%, 57.1% of them had narcissistic personality disorder so now you can make the second claim)
I said children, like this now adult man, are entitled because of over indulgent parents. You’re now trying to push that I made that argument to cover up for the fact you assumed spoiling a child and overindulging them was a form of neglect or abuse. You’re trying to portray it as though you knew all along while trying to originally correct me on that and call me undereducated because of it.
“You also show no consideration for whether there is another psychological variable that could have impacted their functioning: do they have an anxiety disorder, are they on the autism spectrum, have these problems gone undiagnosed? Again, there’s hints in the text that suggest these may be issues involved in the situation.”
It doesn’t matter if they had anxiety, or other undiagnosed problems that we can only speculate about because you want to provide him as much cushioning as possible. Disorders, illnesses, are not something you can use to excuse shitty behavior. Him throwing a fit about having to get a job isn’t indicative of undiagnosed problems, it’s indicative of entitlement. I have PTSD and suffer from occasional mood swings. Neither if those things would give me an excuse for treating the people around me poorly. At this point you’re pulling out anything you think might soften the blow for the TIM here. What next? “well he was 22 so maybe he was drunk and didn’t know what he was doing”
We can speculate all day about the inner workings of whatever was going on. That doesn’t change that he is aware enough to know he wants to drop out, aware enough to know how to throw a fit about having to get a job. And what you’re doing is in fact on some level trying to lessen the extent of what he did by doing all this. Did his parents fuck up in raising him? Yes. But they didn’t choke a 14 year old. He did. Could he have an undiagnosed mental health issue? Statistically speaking yes. But since when was that an excuse for abusive behavior, especially to that extent?
Also, those articles, if you bothered to read them, include comments from psychologists, if you’re referring to the ones on over indulgence. Let me ask you this, how is it a scapegoat to admit you created a brat? How does that somehow make the parent look good in anyones eyes?
But since those articles aren’t good enough for the almighty big brain tumblr user, here you go.
Several highly visible cases labeled "affluenza" by the press have recently generated countless hours of airtime on radio and TV and in the
“Overindulgence describes a pattern of behaviors among authority figures that frequently results in behaviors characterized by dependence, irresponsibility, and disrespect/defiance (and occasionally all three) among those who are being reared or mentored.” Huh, that sounds a lot like throwing a fit about needing to get a job, and then blaming everyone but yourself after being kicked out for an assault. If anything this conversation has highlighted the fact that you’re willing to pull just about any speculation out of the blue in an attempt to block criticism of a group who, lets be real, would let you sink.
See all articles from this issue
“Overindulgence is a form of child neglect. It hinders children from performing their needed developmental tasks, and from learning necessary life lessons.”
This paper researches on the impacts of overindulgent parenting on children and concludes by stating that parents should consider adopting t
“ it has far-reaching consequences on the development of the child. It leads to the development of entitled children who lack empathy for others.” (Citation is under the papers)
A 2017 AJN Book of the Year Award winner, Essentials of Psychiatric Mental Health Nursing: A Communication Approach to Evidence Based Care,
Page 343 “Overindulgence can be considered a type of neglect that can result in social and emotional impairment, lack of empathy…”
I don’t have to look up scapegoating because it’s what you’ve been doing here for the abuser in this situation. “It’s his parents fault, it’s the school’s fault, it’s the fault of mental illness”. You’re willing to pin the blame on everything except for him. As stated before, his parents didn’t choke and beat his sister, his school didn’t do it, his mental illness didn’t do it. He did. “Micro aggression” you mean like how he let this piece of shit stay in his house up until this point despite the admitted tension? The fact he, again, didn’t even call the police on his son? Didn’t badger him to get a job during the pandemic? Still tried to respect his son’s “identity?”Regardless of ANY external circumstances, HE WAS THE ONE who put his hands on that girl. No form of micro aggression, no amount of mental illness, no amount of past abuse will ever, EVER excuse abusing another person.
And now for my “favorite” part of conversations with gender ideologues.
I am literally half black. A woman of color.
I’ve actually experienced racism. I have had people call me subhuman. I’ve had people spout bullshit about black people at me. I also gotta love how when we bring up race in relation to gender ideology, it’s wrong. But gender ideologues get to draw any comparison they want to benefit their argument. Here’s a tip. If you have to compare your oppression to that of another group, if you can’t articulate how you are treated without bringing another oppressed demographic into it, you aren’t as oppressed as you think you are.
I can articulate my oppression as a woman of color. I’m seen as subhuman by white people on the basis of my skin color. They view themselves as “pure” and think that dark skin inherently means evil. This is irrationally based. I’m seen as subhuman on the basis of my sex. Males view women as incubators and home appliances meant to clean and cook for them as well as take care of them in all other aspects. They still hardly conduct medical research on women and the affects certain medication might have on us, the criteria for diagnosing autism for example is still heavily reliant on how symptoms appear in males, hence why it takes longer to diagnose in females. For a long time and even to this day women are overmedicated because prescription dosages are measured out in how they affect males. To name just 2 examples.
And I can tell you what TIMs *do* experience. Violence at the hands of males. Homelessness. Lack of legitimate, non-cosmetic health care. However as I stated in my response to the other user, that’s because their treatment is more akin to that of gay men. The people who hate them don’t hate them because they view them as women. They see them as males, which they are. But they view them as males who aren’t performing masculinity, and that in their eyes is wrong. They deserve actual human rights afforded to everyone. Cosmetic surgery is not a human right. Hormones that aren’t medically required for actual hormonal imbalance, isn’t a human right. Pronouns aren’t a human right.
So to make a long answer short. I’m an ethnic woman. No I’m not a white supremacist. I’ve stated multiple times I’m a woman of color. It’s in my bio. Your “idk if our host is one” is tu quoque. You’re hoping they’ll have either forgotten I’m a woman of color, or hoping they won’t look into it. It’s an attempt to discredit my arguments by coming for my character.
The idea that males are violent is statistically backed. Black people are not more violent, that is the claim made by white supremacists. Black people DO make up a larger part of the prison system but that is a result of institutionalized racism, and poverty. Poverty breeds crime and the affects of red lining that still linger to this day contribute to it. Because on top of racism classism is a systemic problem. Those are factual.
The white supremacist idea that black people are more criminally inclined is based in nothing and serves to benefit black people.
I think you would agree that in every country, males hold systemic power. In what way would it benefit them to admit they’re responsible for a higher number crimes?
Arrests by offense, age, and gender
And as previously established, I linked it earlier (and right above) , TW retain male criminal patterns. TM retain female criminal patterns. For TW that includes violent crime proclivity. It’s not because they’re trans. Because TIFs are less likely to commit violent crime. It’s because the males are males. That’s not some ill conceived notion that I’m just saying, that’s a studied and observable fact. You’re comparing this studied phenomenon, to debunked racism.
In fact it’s to the benefit of men to change male perpetrators as women so they can skew sex based crime statistics to lend credit to the (statistically false) notion that women are just as violent as men.
Your edits are just repeating points you made earlier that I already addressed so I see no need to address them again.