this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2026
39 points (80.0% liked)

Asklemmy

54172 readers
134 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
 

(I'm just trying to learn. No hidden mockery in this and this is no gotcha bs aimed at t women. I'm NOT transphobic. Just saw this in a debate and wanted to know other people's thoughts)

I just want to know:

  1. Is this factually correct?
  2. If it is, does it matter? Why or why not?
  3. How would you logically respond to this?
  4. How does this statement not contradict with Trans Women are Women
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] DrivebyHaiku@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (13 children)

This is, unfortunately, a very unkind way to interface with the mental situation of transness.

You are looking at this from the perspective that wants to categorize based on your distinct values. You want to determine effectively whether a trans person is effectively really "entitled" to being called what they want to be called. The tagline "a trans woman is a woman" is unfortunate because it is a slogan that doesn't give the full account of why it is important and the whole situation is muddied by the fact that the wider concept of gender performativty actually has almost nothing to do with what trans people are actually experiencing.

Logical fallacy wise stating that something was determined by historical precedent is also a fallacy. It's called an "appeal to tradition".

What is happening culturally with trans people is an attempt based off the findings of years of intensive psychological research to create sociological tools to ease the burdens of a minority population. It might be effective to conceptualize this as language being a technology and that technology effectively being applied as medicine. The people who value the comfort, and quite frankly an expanded lifespan, of trans people adopt this framework but, because to be successful it requires participation. Ideally they teach other people the reasons why it's important to the point they will happily adopt it but that isn't wholly nessisary. As long as someone is treating say, a trans man by using his name and pronouns and not assuming his behaviour to conform to feminine restrictions then effectively the "medicine" works. Hence "trans men are men" ie treat a trans man - as you would a man. An expectation squished into a narrow confine with all nuance removed.

The reason "biological woman" expressly doesn't work is what trans people are responding to is almost completely their own biology. The cultural stuff about gender is kind of just layered on top. What they are responding to when someone uses pronouns is their own physical state. Say you kept calling a trans woman "he/him" what that is doing isn't impacting some attempt at manifesting some spiritual form of womanhood - you are demonstrating you are veiwing her body, seeing phenotypic masculine characteristics and reporting them back to her. Her brain is wired to pair that with a stress reaction. To her those parts of her body are things she desperately wishes doesn't exist because veiwing them, interfacing them sometimes touching them - is abhorrent. What you are doing when you use people's pronouns is effectivly creating a mirror of words. The only question is whether that mirror of words is kind to the viewer. Does it reflect the things that soothe or does it reflect the things that cause strain? That's something the speaker of those words controls because the trans person is powerless in this regard which mirror the speaker will offer them.

Saying "biological woman" aloud in front of a trans woman is effectively indistinguishable from the mental reaction you would create by calling her a man. You are reminding her that both to you and probably to herself that her body is a compromise she has to live with. She's effectively doing everything she can but it will never be enough not just for you... But for her.

When the compromise of living in an imperfect situation becomes too burdensome not living becomes a more viable solution. It won't kill every trans person on it's own but paired with other factors it tips the scale an outsized amount. The reason the historical definition of man and woman is the way it is is because as a population trans people were veiwed as deviant, weird, lead by devils into perversion and a public nuisance and them being miserable was culturally a perfectly fine outcome. Them being miserable in private until they were overwhelmed and killed themselves or being treated as circus freaks- not really a problem.

In modern day we generally hope for better.

[โ€“] DoomSayer@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago (12 children)

And so you should! If I knew someone would want to be known as a "man" or "woman", then I would use those terms. However, responding appropriately to that wish might not mean that I'd be blind to the fact the subject is a trans wo/man. There's simply unlikely to be any reason to point that out.

Similarly, I'm happy with being a "man". I don't really care if others regard me as a "cis man", but I might ask that term is dropped if it's used directly about or to me. I don't and never will recognise the term.

I'll happily use the appropriate pronouns, etc, but as mentioned before, I cannot regard trans women as belonging to the same category as what I am calling here "biological women" because they haven't grown up and lived as women. I mentioned before about female reproduction and reproductive health. It cannot be understated how huge this can be for many women. Periods, period products, period pains, impacts on histamine sensitivies, getting pregnant, ecotopic prenancies, miscarriages, endometriosis, an "incompetant" cervix, still birth, premature birth, full term birth, breast feeding... The list goes on. For sure, these things don't wholly define what it is to be a woman, but it sure as hell helps shape the bodies and minds of the only group of people who make all of us. To forget or ignore that is disrespectful to women, in my opinion.

It doesn't matter how much a trans woman claims to want to be a part of this group, or how upset she gets at the likes of me for saying otherwise, but she will never be a part of that group. I would never say that the particular journey or struggles of a trans woman are less significant, but they are fundamentally different and for that reason it puts them in a similar, but different group.

[โ€“] queermunist@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There are cis women with primary amenorrhea and infertility. They do not have periods, they can not get pregnant.

Are they not women?

[โ€“] DoomSayer@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

Another life history experience that I didn't know about or include on the list.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)