OneMeaningManyNames

He/Him, Anarchist/Communist Front End Developer, originally from BC, currently in coastal Albania. Perpetually looking out for my next exchange community empowerment project across the globe.

  • 15 Posts
  • 17 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
Cake day: July 2nd, 2024
  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mltoAsklemmy@lemmy.ml•What's a good response to someone saying "just change your gender"?English
    1·
    11 days ago

    In general I agree with other responders, in that it is best to let them explain their bigotry. Having said that, and for the record:

    • a stealth trans woman will face misogynist discrimination at work
    • a non-stealth trans woman will face transmisogynist discrimination at work
    • a stealth trans man might be able to take advantage of passing privilege and male privilege combined [1]
    • a non-stealth trans man will face transphobic and misogynist discrimination at work

    If any of the above people are non heteronormative they will face homophobic discrimination either way.

    Let alone that these legal transition procedures are wildly imperfect, and it would be unreasonable to assume that a person can as easily transition in law as they imply. In fact it might take years and $$ just to get just the most important paperwork done[2]. And then what? Do they think that legal name change is like a Permanent Polyjuice Filter that allows you perfectly pass and live as the other gender?? P r e p o s t e r o u s

    Besides, why would anyone transition in paper if they are not transgender? This is the most basic comeback. Ask them “Why don’t you switch genders then? Grass might be greener on the other side.[3]” They will probably respond “But I am not trans”. “Neither am I”, continue, “I just want equality at work, trans rights included”.

    (Source: Old social studies coursework on transgender issues, but some info might be outdated.)

    1. This is not to mean that he might face other types of discrimination in different settings, like reproductive health. ↩︎

    2. And don’t even ask about non-binary provisions, more often than not they are not any. ↩︎

    3. You might also be better looking as a lady than what you look now, lmao, no just kidding don’t say that. ↩︎

  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mlOPtoMemes@lemmy.ml•Not only the books did not shine for women representation but also thisEnglish
    61·
    3 months ago

    Right enough, I came across a Wikipedia article “Politics of Harry Potter” yesterday, it was weird to read. Especially under the light of Rowling’s (um… post 2015ish?) transphobic saga, most of the cringe article reads as a complete trainwreck in hindsight, since Rowling had been celebrated by the Left and condemned by the Right at the time. Hilarious.

    Some random quotes for your entertainment

    Bill O’Reilly joined in the political fray over Harry Potter character Albus Dumbledore’s outing by asking if it was part of a “gay agenda” to indoctrinate children. He called J. K. Rowling a provocateur for telling fans about Dumbledore’s sexuality after the books were written. His guest, Entertainment Weekly Senior Editor Tina Jordan, called his “indoctrination” claims “a shallow argument”, saying “indoctrination is a very strong word” because “we all know gay people, whether we know it or not.”[11] O’Reilly continued the following day, saying that the real problem was that Rowling was teaching “tolerance” and “parity for homosexuals with heterosexuals”. His guest, Dennis Miller, said that tolerance was good and didn’t think you could indoctrinate a child into being gay.[12]

    (Replace gay for trans in the statement above and try to not roll on the floor laughing)

    Catholic fantasy author Regina Doman wrote an essay titled “In Defense of Dumbledore”, in which she argued that the books actually support Catholic teaching on homosexuality because Dumbledore’s relationship with the dark wizard Grindelwald leads to obviously terrible results, as he becomes interested in dark magic himself, neglects his responsibilities towards his younger sister and ultimately causes her death.[46][unreliable source?]

    Rowling herself says:

    “I do not think I am pessimistic but I think I am realistic about how much you can change deeply entrenched prejudice, so my feeling would be that if someone were a committed racist, possibly Harry Potter is not going to have an effect.”[21][non-primary source needed]

    “People like to think themselves superior and that if they can pride themselves in nothing else they can pride themselves on perceived purity.”[25]

    “I’ve never thought, ‘It’s time for a post-9/11 Harry Potter book,’ no. But what Voldemort does, in many senses, is terrorism, and that was quite clear in my mind before 9/11 happened… but there are parallels, obviously. I think one of the times I felt the parallels was when I was writing about the arrest of Stan Shunpike, you know? I always planned that these kinds of things would happen, but these have very powerful resonances, given that I believe, and many people believe, that there have been instances of persecution of people who did not deserve to be persecuted, even while we’re attempting to find the people who have committed utter atrocities. These things just happen, it’s human nature. There were some very startling parallels at the time I was writing it.”[78][better source needed]

    Might I add, the latter statement (likening DeathEaters to terrorists) and her expressed belief that the trans movement are like the Death Eaters, leads to the logical conclusion that she thinks trans activism is …terrorism? I would not put it past her, and I can’t fathom what a real Ministry could do with such a false equivalence.

  • OneMeaningManyNames@lemmy.mlOPtoMemes@lemmy.ml•Is this for real? (Please see text)English
    1·
    3 months ago

    Since this vile comment goes against Lemmy etiquette I need not provide a response. But I will.

    how other people call themselves

    You must be another level of stupid to write this out. Perhaps you mean, I shouldn’t care what other “governments” or “majorities” want their citizens to call or not-call themselves. Only a nationalist would say such a thing, that your government has the right to self-define (or …impose?) how its people call themselves. This is some true Orban-level shit you managed to fit in your, well, fit.

    And, yes, this is a politics issue I want to see in the same maps we monitor US gender politics with.

    obviously not German

    Very proudly not so. I cherish the fact that German nationalists tend to end up shot or hang, as one of the few things that provide meaning to my post-WWII life. The historical equivalent of a narcissist man-child demanding attention to himself, a real small-dick energy nation, that enthusiastically voted for a mustached idiot for the job. So, not German, and so happy about it.

    obviously scared about inclusivity

    The fact that you fail to understand this is a pro-inclusivity post means that you are so dump that you would have been euthanized in your own country, less than 100 years ago, unless you enrolled to a specific party of anti-intellectual idiots. Ah I forgot, you already are. Sound survival of the fittest strategy.

    Now, let’s sit around waiting you to ridicule yourself with another one of these comments ROFL