From: ahk@chinet.com
Louis Epstein wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>Louis Epstein wrote:
>>>It should be noted that the person in question is what "trans rights"
>>>advocates call a "trans woman" and "gender critical" types (I am one)
>>>call a "trans-identified male"...genetically male and seeking to be
>>>treated as if actually female.
>>No, it should NOT be so noted.
>You want the writer's usage,which does not comport with that
>by people on either side of the issue and can only confuse,
>to stand without comment?
The comment made the initial misunderstanding ever so much worse. From
the words themselves, "gender critical" imparts no meaning at all, yet
you say you are of that type.
>>In another followup, you stated that no crime should be eligible for the
>>death penalty. Well, I beg you to reconsider your opinion. There are
>>people out there willfully using English as a blunt instrument to
>>destroy all communication and create misunderstanding. The portion of
>>the trans community that lectures everyone else that they must keep
>>track of this massive taxonomy of groupings, classifcations, and
>>variants, using them in every day speech, else someone else will
>>officially take offense on behalf of another and shame the speaker for
>>being trasphobic ARE ABSOLUTELY COMMITTING CRIMES THAT SHOULD BE DEATH
>>PENALTY ELIGIBLE.
>There can never be any justification whatsoever for
>a government to kill an unarmed prisoner who is at
>its mercy.
Who will defend communication? Communication cannot defend itself.
You yourself just attacked communicstion for understanding, instead of
standing up for umderstanding.
>>I realized what was going on. When I hear "trans male", I sort of
>>understand that someone has made the transition from female to male.
>>But the media referred to the roommate as a trans male, apparently still
>>male but considering transitioning but not having yet taken steps.
>>It wasn't a mislabel because that's the ordinary use of language.
>The "trans rights" types believe that whenever a Y-chromosomed
>person decides he is a woman,he always has been one,and continues
>to have always been one until he changes his mind.
I am aware. But it goes well beyond that. He changed his belief,
therefore, everybody around him must change their use of language.
He can do what he likes as long as it has no adverse impact for anybody
else. He cannot demand an all new language.
>>You used "trans woman" and "trans-identified male" in the same sentence,
>>claiming they mean the same, and stated for a fact that the roommate
>>wanted others to treat him as a woman.
>>Well, for a fact, YOU don't know how far along he is and, given his age,
>>may either be going through a phase or will really and truly pursue it
>>all the way with medical and surgical treatment.
>>I may defend to the death your right to say things I disagree with, but
>>I will defend the English language itself against anybody and everybody
>>who would use it to destroy communication and sew misunderstanding.
>Would you rather misunderstanding be sewn than sown?
I would never force you to follow my misteak.
>>Being transgender is an individual choice (and no, that there's
>>some permanent biological condition that's impossible to treat with
>>psychology under any and all circumstances is inapplicable to the vast
>>majority choosing trans) and can be done successfully regardless of how
>>anybody else uses trans terms that some in the trans community demand
>>everyone else uses.
>>This discussion of the roommate is the perfect example of why avoiding
>>the use of English as intended created misunderstanding.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
