[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]


I'm feeling very conflicted.

I like this creator, but some of the things they poke fun at in the video are things that sound similar to how my friends express themselves.

Can you guys please give me your honest and detailed opinion about both the video and what you think of genders and identity?


That's the most seemless transition i've ever seen, first off. That's amazing. Grats to that dude.

As for the rant, i do kindof agree in a large sense. It does feel sometimes like a lot of people attribute being trans to just, like, having a personality that doesn't 100% line up with traditional gender norms, or even as some bizarre means of political action. Self expression isn't the same thing as gender, a lot of people with more laissez-faire approach to gender seem to really just treat it like that, as a rather childish attempt to rebel and stick it to the man, and confusing gender with just, you know, personality. That's pretty irresponsible when you have people with real dysphoria making huge life-and-death decisions that could be influenced by them. As for kids, i don't think anyone should be making these decisions before or during puberty. Before like, late high school, you're still figuring out your shit, and i think it's incredibly irresponsible to recommend something as extreme as transition surgery to a child who is still figuring things out and experimenting. Plus, those decisions would be made more by the parents, and that's a horrifying road to travel down, having someone potentially transitioned against their will because their parents want to make a political statement or something. Personally, i don't think someone's transitioning is the business of anyone but themselves. I don't want parents or others involved at all. People should be able to express themselves how they want without being labeled a gender. I mean you could call someone a tomboy, or a sensitive boy, but that's their road to travel, it doesn't concern anyone but them, and perhaps their doctor. Hell, i don't think the idea of gender should even exist, but it's inevitable with dysphoria and the social mythos around the sexes, so it makes a certain amount of sense for man and woman to exist as genders, as that idea exists in a large capacity, but millions of genders is dumb and unnecessary. People having personality isn't the same as being transgender.

I basically think the guy hit the nail right on the head.


I really respect this guy and his opinion on the issue.

I don't agree with the basis of what might be referred to as modern gender theory, but to the extent that I can accept parts of it, I like their takes.


File: 1569491728983.jpg (42.72 KB, 794x695, 794:695, yourself.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google


>Can you guys please give me your honest and detailed opinion about both the video...

1:54: They said their relationship began in high school, and it is apparent - the way they act is typical high-schooler-ish.

I get the general vibe that both of then feel insecure about themselves and their relationship.

4:00: Thinking about what they just ranted about in the preceding two minutes, their tone and demeanor is conservative and reminiscent of someone who has not thought a lot about what they're saying. The couple's further interactions support the hypothesis that they are typical high-schooler-ish.

5:42: I agree with the idea that labels are just labels for things we encounter in reality, but in order for their to be communication about these things, certain constraints must be imposed on the uses of these labels. If you are going to define yourself as a man as opposed to a trans-man, then society has very fine constraints for that, including - in conservative households - being born and raised by society with the assumption that you are a man and all the societal and cultural expectations that go along with this.

Of course, different men will have different experiences in how they relate to their society, but the common thread is that they look like men and were raised as a man, with no serious discussion of and no expectation that they would ever be anything different.

People who try to re-define words confuse labels with reality. They desire a certain label, thinking that this label will bring them happiness. And so they identify as a "man," and then fight and try to change reality because they value the label over their natural self. It must be remembered that people define labels - labels should not define people. Mere labels are not something to fight over.

>"If you wanna be what you wanna be - call it for what it is, and don't label it transgender."

So, as you can see, given the subtleties of the human mind, "transgender" is a more accurate label. It is not being anti-LGBT to make this argument. It is just the way the human mind works. For example, I could say that I'm the literal definition of a "unicorn," and if people started to believe it, what label do we have left to call an actual unicorn? We would have to invent a new term for that which was lost.

Ultimately, however, language comes down to convenience, and it changes naturally over time. The meanings of words today are different from their meanings as conceived of by people 100, 200, 1000 years ago. If you are transgender and want't to be defined as an actual man, then you have to accept that on the conservative end, some people will reject your label completely. Others might accept it, but then go on to further define you as a deformed version of a man. On the more liberal end are people who are intelligent enough to see that language changes naturally, and in seeing you as one of the first personified reflections of that change, aligning themselves with this natural process, they redefine "man" in their mind such that they are in alignment with the natural change of language.

Regardless, however, of the response - as to whether they are positive or negative in nature, my formerly-mentioned scenarios do not say. For example, a conservative might be aware that labels do not define or make a person any more or less valuable, but merely reject the notion of redefining the label on the grounds that its use is not yet prevalent enough in society. This would be a positive response, as the person is still genuinely valued. A negative reaction from a conservative might occur if they are attach their identity to the label and therefore take offense to someone else's perceptions of what that label should be.

A positive or negative response from a liberal would occur similarly. If they make any part of their beliefs into their identity and see labels as anything other than a convenience, then there can be problems.

10:00: I agree that whether or not someone should transition is a serious question that should be given a lot of thought. I also think that a basic understanding and constant application of philosophy - and learning how to know yourself from a young age - can solve a lot of society's problems. Without this understanding, it might be difficult to know if you should transition - especially if you have under-supportive or over-supportive parents and in dealing with societal pressures whether from family or broader society. Learning to know yourself is difficult for anyone, regardless of the specific nature of their challenges.

11:22: I tend to agree with him when he says you either are or are not trans... but this is where knowing yourself comes in. If you had the benefit of growing up in a relatively healthy family environment, it will may be black or white - you will basically know what you are. But if you grow up in an abusive environment, I can see how it might be more difficult to tell. I do not think being trans or not is based solely on genetics. I think it is environmental as well. This is why all of these different kinds of gender identities and such are coming into existence now. I'm sure they existed to some degree in the past, but it is only in this era that conditions are right for them to be expressed in this way. It's because we live in an environment that allows for this kind of expression. As technology continues to advance, transitioning will become easier and easier, and more and more people are going to do it. Eventually, trans-species will have its time - "species dysphoria" already exists, but will eventually become medically-recognized, and the national argument will be renewed in that generation, as early procedures will be similarly risky and life-changing. They key is to know yourself and what makes you happy.

tldr; Know yourself.



Well, didn't really finish the video.

I felt like after 11 minutes, it just seemed like yet another commentary on a strawmen that these two seem not to recognize as such, or commentary on the same nutcase cherry picked people treated as if they were indicative of a much more prominent trend that's not actually a trend at all.

And as for gender and identity. Well, in the video it seems like this guy is working from a sort of TERF-like and trans-medicalist  assumption when he says something like "don't call personality gender" when referring to non-binary people.

Which, of course, makes the assumption that if someone is non-binary, that they are only non-binary to make some political statement, or identifying a certain way just because of their personality traits. That's ridiculously presumptuous, basically putting words in others mouths. It disappoints me that a transgender man would think that way consider that everything that guy must have experienced that led them to realize they were trans would have been entirely internal and something frustratingly unprovable to others since those experiences produce no empirical evidence. It's just ridiculously patronizing to tell non-binary people "no, you just want to make a political statement" or "you don't have to change your gender just to fit your personality" in response to them explaining why they actually identify the way they do


I would really rather you finish the video, as you can't provide a complete judgement without hearing everything he has to say. I know it's a bit lengthy, but please, when you have the time. And then if you still hold the same stance, I will hear it out.



Well, I watched through it all the way and all there was after the 11 minute mark were two people cringing over the same transgender guy everyone in this clique of YouTubers cringe at all the time, followed by them cringing over a transphobic video.

None of the really did much to change my position on this video 11 mins in.

It comes off as patronizing and arrogant and presumptuous. Not much better than that Vice episode where Blair White shits on a non-binary person in front of a whole room full of other people by telling them that their identity is "strictly political"


Alright. Thank you for taking the time to watch the rest of it.

So, if I may ask, if you had a conversation with these two, face to face, and let's assume that they stayed polite an on topic, how would you want to go about explaining your view to them?

I think I am seeking a middle ground and a way to speak to people because I live in a town with a lot of churches. The people are loving, but not really understanding.

I think what I am trying to seek from this thread is both, how I feel on all this, and a way to better communicate with the people in my community.


Sorry about the name change there, I was on my phones connection


As someone who has issues with this topic, I think I'll say my peice but I'll stress that my opinon may be biased.

I am against the notion of someone self-diagnosing themselves as trans, and I'm really against the notion of someone taking their treatment into their own hands like, ordering hormones online or something. I think it's a big decision, that needs to be made with a doctor and preferably a mental health care professional. Like the video says, it's irreversable and a big decision.

I don't think kids should be put on hormones by their parents. I think that being trans is something someone needs to come to grips with personally and with their doctor. Your teenage years are supposed to be the time you expereiment and figure out who you are. So I don't think you should be allowed to transition until you are 18.

The the first video they watched, it seems like they are just taking potshots at this person. It seems pretty catty to make fun of a teenager trying to figure themselves out. If you don't agree with him, that's fine. But why sit there and mock him for his opinion like this?

The second video they watch, that person seems like a jackass who's trying to justify their transphobia. He's saying a bunch of things with nothing to back them up.

The bathroom argument is kind of dumb, and I feel like we covered in a thread a few weeks ago. Let people poop wherever they want.


File: 1569554820747.jpg (396.54 KB, 824x1200, 103:150, clownpiece_52062508.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>As for kids, i don't think anyone should be making these decisions before or during puberty.
>So I don't think you should be allowed to transition until you are 18.
The problem is that gender transition works best if done before the irreversible effects of puberty take place.  As for surgery, that can wait until the patient is over 18, but hormone therapy definitely works best if started before puberty.  Probably puberty blockers can be used to temporarily delay puberty to give more time for the child to consider the decision.


That's something to consider. But we don't allow children to make big decisions like that for a reason. Children can't work a job, can't consent to sex, can't sign legal documents and so on. Because their brains aren't developed enough to make those kind of decisions. So it's risking asking a child to make that decision because (as far as I am aware, please correct me if I am wrong here) there is no definitive way to determine if someone is trans, like a blood test or something, and it's based primarily on one's feelings and state of mind. And a child's mind is not completely developed.


File: 1569560301853.png (591.09 KB, 600x879, 200:293, 1481326279883.png) ImgOps Google

>Children can't work a job
I had a full-time summer job when I was 16.
>can't consent to sex
In Europe, many countries set the legal age-of-consent to 15.  Maybe putting the child on puberty blockers until 15 would be a good idea?

> So it's risking asking a child to make that decision
Yes, there is a risk that the child will make the wrong decision and end up with the wrong hormonally-induced bodily changes.  But if the children are right more than 50% of the time, wouldn't the benefits outweight the risks?


Well, 15 or 16 is debatably kind of a gray area between being a "child" and an adult, but in most cases, is pretty well after puberty. I think pre-pubescent children are not developed enough mentally to make those kind decisions.  

I don't think 50% is enough. That means half the kids make the wrong decision. It'd have to be more like 80% for me to even consider it viable, and even then, I'd still be against it because of age issue I mentioned earlier.

As for puberty blockers, I'd have to know more about how effective those are and what dangers it poses to someone to delay puberty that long. Without that info, I can't make a good decision on whether or not it's worth the risks.


The video was jagged and hard to follow, it didn't seem to be making any kind of real point, nor was it particularly entertaining.  I give it 1 star out of 5.

What I think of genders and identity is that gender is a label used for sexual selection and anything beyond that isn't particularly useful, and in fact sometimes a hindrance to usefulness.


File: 1569701718980.png (389.78 KB, 409x396, 409:396, totally rufus.PNG) ImgOps Google

They ask the interesting question whether you are a horrible person if you date based on gender.

The answer, of course is YES!


What if you are a person who wants to have a kid though? Like, your own kid, and not adopt?

Wouldn't it be more cruel to waste years of someone's life just to later break up with them because they can't give you a kid?


I can't tell if you are joking... but obviously the existence of heterosexual people and exclusively homosexual people means that a lot of people date based on gender. I think it's quite common.


How many people would make the same choices in high school looking back from their 20s and 30s though? These kids are literally mentally compromised because they have a cocktail of hormones pumping through them and exist in an environment rife with social pressure's they've been shown to be overly sensitive to. Why let them make a huge, life-altering change like that when we don't even let them drink?


>you shouldn't be putting chemicals in your body to look androgynous.
>a transition is only acceptable if you're transitioning from one binary gender to another
Oh, cool they're probably gonna explain why they think that.
>Immediately move on to the next topic.

Well okay, then.

This basic flow is followed throughout the video. Shoe on head introduces her trans friend to some reactionary video or idea like 'should people be allowed to give hormones to their three year olds' and then the friend says 'absolutely not' very controversial and brave.

But like, actual discussions or dives into the evidence are not forthcoming, it's just kind of a circlejerk. Which I guess is what you'd want, if you already agree with them, and think you have good reasons for doing so, maybe you'd like to do that, but I feel like maybe before you start calling NB invalid, or endorsing a channel that calls NB people invalid, you should consider if that doesn't require some pretty damn good reasons.

I especially dislike the part where they pull up videos to make fun of Milo. Like, damn, what did this person ever do to you? There's a point where they're just laughing at them and imitating their voice and mannerisms. It's just bullying, and I feel like by watching this parasocial garbage, I've become complicit.


Shoe-On-Head is constantly making fun of that kid. Which, ok yeah, you disagree with his views on gender. But to just mock someone like that isn't addressing the disagreement. It's being catty.


That's a fairly mild way of putting that.


I don't disagree. Do you get a Mean Girls vibe from it too?


I haven't watched mean girls!

The thing I can liken it most to is my own experiences being bullied in grade 3 through 10.


I've never seen that movie all the way through either. It's a girl's movie

But yeah, I've been the victim of bullying myself. But guys are more direct when they bully you.


I mean, not necessearily.

This is fairly direct too, isn't it?


Well, not as direct as a punch. Or just insulting you to your face. This is a more indirect "look at this person and laugh" kind of bullying.

Not saying one is any less hurtful or better or worse than the other. Just men and women use different flavors of bullying.


I definitely never experienced this! For me, bullying was always quite elaborate. It was clever name-calling, imitation and recurring gags. All the stuff that you see in this video.

You're very keen to stereotype this as male or female behavior, but I think really it's just culture.


Well, many of the differences between men and women ARE societal (or "cultural" if you wanna use that word) so I can't say I completely disagree.

[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]