Trans Forum

[vennie]

5 hours ago, Starmada said:

The fact that we already separate men's pics in their own section, to me, already opens the door for such a thing. Having those clearly labeled sections works for the benefit of both people who are into that sort of thing, and people who are not. If someone is not into dudes, they know not to check out the men's pics forum. It's not segregation, it's categorization.

Just as much as we should respect that there are people who claim themselves as those labels, and there are people who enjoy that, we must respect the fact that not everyone is into that. Trolling fuckpipes will happen no matter what we do, but at least giving that sort of thing it's own section, we can minimize the 'surprise' aspect that could lead to issues for either side of the equation.

 

S'my opinion anyhow.

 

Agreed.

On Curvage we make the distinction Man vs Woman. Trans is the same type of categorization as Man vs Woman, so why not a seperate board?

Besides, the LGBTQ-community itself has been pushing the intersectionality agenda pretty hard, so what's wrong with using the same categorization here aswell?

We don't need a seperate forum for every letter in the LGBTQIAPKGrehheRET$#TfdRT4j39gm9340tu4......-community, but we can have a 'CIS' part of the forum and a 'Non-Binary' part of the forum.

That way everyone can stay in their lane and we avoid the many collisions that are bound to happen otherwise. 

[vennie]

1 hour ago, vennie said:

Agreed.

On Curvage we make the distinction Man vs Woman. Trans is the same type of categorization as Man vs Woman, so why not a seperate board?

Besides, the LGBTQ-community itself has been pushing the intersectionality agenda pretty hard, so what's wrong with using the same categorization here aswell?

We don't need a seperate forum for every letter in the LGBTQIAPKGrehheRET$#TfdRT4j39gm9340tu4......-community, but we can have a 'CIS' part of the forum and a 'Non-Binary' part of the forum.

That way everyone can stay in their lane and we avoid the many collisions that are bound to happen otherwise. 

Actually, thinking about it some more, maybe a seperate board isn't that great of an idea.

Once we start going down the path of adding seperate message boards for every type and category of intersectional grouping, we open the flood gates having to open up a new message board whenever someone feels there needs to be a seperate group.

Let's stick to Male and Female message boards.

[vennie]

18 minutes ago, Avataг said:

 

No, it isn't and no, it doesn't. The categorization in man and women is based on the perception if a person is of male or female sex. The categories are selected by gender. Transsexuality means that a person experiences a gender identity that is inconsistent with their assigned sex and desires to permanently transition to the gender with which they identify. You'd do them a great disservice if you'd refuse them to be categorized as man or women, as far as I understand. There is absolutely no need to create other categories as those for visible gender, as far as I'm concerned. And for there are three gender classifications, we could categorize as man, women and intersex persons.

 

Yeah, which is why I added my second comment.

Man/Woman/Trans is on the gender spectrum.

Man/male and Woman/Female is on the biological sex spectrum.

And since at Curvage we meant biological sex, we should stick to a message board for Men and a message board for Women.

[vennie]

29 minutes ago, Avataг said:

• Gender
  • Male
  • Female
  • Intersex

 

• Biological sex
  • Male
  • Female

[vennie]

2 minutes ago, Avataг said:

@vennie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

 

I will concede there are the intersex people, even if they're rare-ish (1 in 1000?) and represents a group of people with chromosomal/other disorders.
And if they're disorders, do we really want to use them to describe the typical sexes?

Also, you were using the word gender, which is a social construct described in terms of masculinity vs femininity, which is different from biological sex.
So in order for your list to be a little more accurate, I would exchange 'Gender' for '(Biological) Sex'.

[vennie]

31 minutes ago, Avataг said:

@vennie

Gender and biological sex are used synonymical: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gender#English

Argentina, Austria, Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, Germany, Iceland, India, Kenya, Malta, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, The Netherlands, Uruguay and some states in the US think of intersex as a third gender. I don't vote for Curvage following that lead, I just don't want to close my eyes to social changes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinction also states that science uses biological sex differently from the social construct of gender. I'm more partial to science instead of what the general public/government professes, so maybe that's why I think differently about it.

If medical science has embraced intersexual people as the third gender, I will defer to that.

As far as the list of countries, that scores no points with me because these days it's a hype or 'in' for countries and their leaders to not only change reactively under societal pressure, but proactively to score brownie points with the general public (Justin Trudeau anyone?). Besides that, countries and their leaders aren't comprised of scientists or even influenced a great deal by science, so referencing them is like trying to prove climate change is happening by listing A-list celebrities who say it's true  (yes, climate change is happening, but I can't take a persons word for it just because they're a celebrity).  

[vennie]

14 hours ago, maybejames said:

I think we are getting bogged down in semantics here.

The problem with a separate forum is getting people to use it correctly. Some people may identify with the Trans adjective, others may not. What happens when those people who identify as female decide their post should be in the Women of Curvage forum? Are we as moderators to decide that they actually belong in the Trans/Non-Binary forum based solely on how they look? If not then we are back to square one with a small minority of members getting angry and abusive towards these people "ruining the website".

I can appreciate some members have strong views on this but I think it is worth focusing on how exactly creating any kind of segregation would work in practice.

Perhaps for different reasons but we basically agree on that we shouldn't have a separate message board. 

A Trans heads-up would be wise, if said poster wants to avoid any negative comments that his/her pictures will create if there's no heads-up. 

[vennie]

32 minutes ago, Avataг said:

It's a medical matter of fact that there are (intersexual) people born with sex characteristics that don't fit into the binary gender norm: Link.

I'm not desputing there are intersexual people. But having a certain percentage of intersexual people, which are at their core chromosomal disorders (according to wikipedia) in the population doesn't equate the condition being elevated to third-sex status.

51 minutes ago, Avataг said:

Transgender people have a gender identity or gender expression that differs from their sex assigned at birth. Some transgender people who desire medical assistance to transition from one sex to another identify as transsexual.

What are you trying to say? I was just pointing out the difference (for me) between sex and gender, as stated in the linked Wiki page:

" The distinction between sex and gender differentiates a person's biological sex (the anatomy of an individual's reproductive system, and secondary sex characteristics) from that person's gender, which can refer to either social roles based on the sex of the person (gender role) or personal identification of one's own gender based on an internal awareness (gender identity). "

59 minutes ago, Avataг said:

1. Government decisions were preceded by court decisions. Courts in democratic states tend to make fair and free decisions.

2. About two billion people are affected by these decisions in these countries. That is about a quarter of the world's population. And yet the proportion of intersex people in this huge number of people is estimated to be just a few million in the single-digit range (or up to 20 million, at an outside estimate). I don't believe that politicians can score major brownie points with an agenda for those few people that suffer from not being able to tell if they were born male or female.

Politicians score major brownie points whenever 'they fight for a good cause', however small the amount of people they fight for. Makes for good self promotion. Because on top of the people it directly affects it'll also win over all the people who agree with that cause, which is a serious amount of people because most issues are quite binary/for-and-against.

So, if the total population is 2 billion, and let's say 25% of the people are for, 25% of the people are against and 50% don't have an opinion, a politician will still use the cause to sway those 25% x 2 billion = 500 million votes to his advantage.

And the 1 billion people who don't necessarily have an opinion on the issue, might be nudged towards voting for the politician if it looks like he is 'at least fighting the good cause', or defending the underdog.

Seems like politics 101 to me. But, to be fair, I'm not a politician so I could be wrong.

1 hour ago, Avataг said:

I must state, though, that I'm guilty of derailing the thread from its original theme. I shouldn't have brought up the discussion about intersex being the third gender. I should have known that people might mix up the terms and concepts of intersex and transsexual.

Agreed. Maybe we should let it rest.