Berkeley Prof tangles with Sen Hawley, calls him trans phobic

You have two assumptions here that I do not agree with. While it's true sometimes "being a man" involves a recognition of certain attributes that are considered respectable, these attributes are not exclusive to males, and when females demonstrate said attributes, it's not considered a compliment to tell them they are "being a man." "Being a man" is a reference to a cultural identity of what males are expected to do. It's good enough, for me, at least, to recognize that what's "being a man" in some cultures is not "being a man" in other cultures. A propensity to get in a fight is one example that comes to mind. Owning a firearm to use it as a threat vs. seeking to de-escalate is another example. I would never use the concept of "being a man" in this context outside of folks that I know are like-minded culturally. In other words, there is no universal standard implied or expected. One example here might be "being a man" to a Christian has implied integrity/accountability aspects built in that non-Christian "men" might not agree with or adhere to.

And to say there's always been a social component to it ignores the countless times that the terms male/man have been used interchangeably (as have female/woman). The challenge is for those that seek to disenfranchise the two terms to present a healthy way to allow the idea to be accepted (or rejected for that matter).

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

 

Men can get pregnant?

 

Adding that the caveat that I haven't read every post in this thread and while I am probably much more sympathetic to transgender persons than the majority of posters on this board, a person with ovaries and a uterus and the capacity for pregnancy is woman even if that person happens to have facial and body hair from the administration of male hormones and identifies as male.

 

I think it's compassionate and respectful that you are willing to personally address an individual transgender person consistent with their gender identity and preference despite whatever convictions you have about it. I do not think it's a leap to extend that same rationale of respect when speaking about a transgender person you don't know or when speaking about transgender folks collectively/as a group. The latter scenarios require no additional concessions than you're already making to the individual you personally know or are speaking to directly; you can still have opinions about fairness in sports, etc. Just my two cents.

 

No, you just disappoint me. I expect better from you because I know you are a smart decent person. I have a lot more respect for you than I do some of the other conservative-leaning posters here. So you catch my attention when you say stuff I strongly disagree with.

 

There are absolutely different views and expectations of what it means to be a man; however, there is enough commonality that most people who identify as men prefer to be viewed as men, particularly by their cultural peers.

Which, again, is why saying a man, even a trans man, isn't a man is pretty inherently insulting.

Put yourself in yourself their shoes. I assume you identify as a man. If everyone you told that to took one look at you and responded with "nah, you ain't a real man" how would you feel? Honestly.

Maybe you're a mental fortress and could just brush it off by saying to yourself that everyone has different views of what it means to be a man. But for most people, I'd say they'd feel pretty darn ostracized and demeaned.

All people want to do is give that same consideration to trans folk. It costs nothing to treat them respectfully and call them what they wish to be called.

 

According to what I've been instructed in this thread pro-lifers aren't just waging a war on Women, they are waging a war on Men(if they are pregnant also)

 

Red letter day in THFSG, all the religious bigots have found tolerance.

 

Just think of how much people think of being a 'man' is in relationship to all the stuff people would tell you was for "pussies" at a formative age, like crying or liking soccer.

 

Racism is evil.

Acknowledgment of basic biology is truth. The truth sometimes hurts people's feelings, it stings for some people more than others.

Actual racists are shamed because their views are evil, incorrect, and naturally exclusive, people who believe in basic biology should not be shamed for believing in the truth. I know this is an overdone comparison, but that's right out of 1984. Society will pressure and intimidate you into thinking 2 + 2 = 5.

 

It is not exclusive of them, gator_lawyer, it's just categorizing them based on fact rather than fiction. Nobody's saying people born women who claim to be men can't get pregnant. They are simply saying those people are women. "Transgender man" in this context is simply a biological woman, "transgender man" is a misnomer.

All you and the professor are doing are prioritizing the feelings of what you perceive to be a marginalized group over the feelings of those who think traditionally, who happen to be correct.

 

What is the biological definition of woman?

 

Woman: An adult human female.

Female: of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggs.

Your turn.

 

What is a person with a penis and ovaries?

 

What's your definition of a woman? I answered your question. You answer mine.

 

Someone with the actual ability to "go eff themself" (kidding obviously).

Serious question though: Are we conflating the phrase "be a man" with "being biologically male"?

 

Wouldnt a racist say racism is an "acknowledgement of basic biology or hard truths that hurt peoples feelings?"

 

You must comply and agree with the whims of anyone or you are a bigot man come on, you know this.