Thank you. I think the user's intent there was also to present trans as a third category, separate from "man" or "woman", so as to deny the transgender employee membership in one of these groups. ("Woman". We know it is "woman" bc a man with a girl child is on his soap box.)
It's the same way the right has used the word "illegal" as a noun over the last 20 years. It's dehumanizing and othering, as you said, and it's right out of the Nazi playbook.
You wrote: “To the people who use "a transsexual" the purpose is not to list an important feature, but to name the only defining feature, to assert that no other features matter, to stand firm on the ground that to know this one thing about me is to know me entire.” I’m not sure that is true any more than using the the words male and female is to make,e the only defining feature. ?
Actually this post helped me recognize why it makes my skin crawl when people say “a female” to refer to a woman. Thank you CP- It is being used as a noun!
A female WHAT??
And yeah, the result is that it others, by assuming “a female” is something other than the norm, naturally not the default. Ugh!
There has been a terrible history, however. Think of the n-word. It's derived from a cognate of "black", which we use today without concern. The difference isn't in the definitions. It's the history of how the word was used.
And like the n-word -- as Samuel Abram points out -- there are people who might use the word for themselves, even, yes, as a noun, and who do so honestly (not as in "I identify as an attack helicopter" attacks on trans activism). My general criticism of the term's use in the mouths of cis people shouldn't be taken as an attack on trans people who claim the word. In fact, I use the word myself to describe myself -- just never as a noun.
In my experience, the only time it’s okay to call someone a “transsexual” is if they refer to themself as one. I know at least one person who does so. After all, you refer to yourself with two reclaimed slurs, so why not people who call themselves transsexuals?
No offense, it's like hearing "the" before an ethnicity or origin country. "The blacks in NYC" indicates you're going to have a totally different conversation than if it was "Blacks in NYC". And thus, all the more reason for solidarity. 💪
Thank you. I think the user's intent there was also to present trans as a third category, separate from "man" or "woman", so as to deny the transgender employee membership in one of these groups. ("Woman". We know it is "woman" bc a man with a girl child is on his soap box.)
It's the same way the right has used the word "illegal" as a noun over the last 20 years. It's dehumanizing and othering, as you said, and it's right out of the Nazi playbook.
Yep. I probably should have mentioned that myself.
Agreed.
Right on.
Fuck yeah CD. GET EM. 😡
Didn’t you mean “a transexual 8th level psionicist/myrmidon with a helpful but annoying mage comrade?
Folio, you are going to drive me to drink. Scotch. Actually, whaddayano? I still have 6 or 7 shots left of the Laphroiag. Guess I don't need driving.
Orders received, O Captain, My Captain!
Correction-name the only defining feature.
You wrote: “To the people who use "a transsexual" the purpose is not to list an important feature, but to name the only defining feature, to assert that no other features matter, to stand firm on the ground that to know this one thing about me is to know me entire.” I’m not sure that is true any more than using the the words male and female is to make,e the only defining feature. ?
Actually this post helped me recognize why it makes my skin crawl when people say “a female” to refer to a woman. Thank you CP- It is being used as a noun!
A female WHAT??
And yeah, the result is that it others, by assuming “a female” is something other than the norm, naturally not the default. Ugh!
It **could have been that**.
There has been a terrible history, however. Think of the n-word. It's derived from a cognate of "black", which we use today without concern. The difference isn't in the definitions. It's the history of how the word was used.
And like the n-word -- as Samuel Abram points out -- there are people who might use the word for themselves, even, yes, as a noun, and who do so honestly (not as in "I identify as an attack helicopter" attacks on trans activism). My general criticism of the term's use in the mouths of cis people shouldn't be taken as an attack on trans people who claim the word. In fact, I use the word myself to describe myself -- just never as a noun.
In my experience, the only time it’s okay to call someone a “transsexual” is if they refer to themself as one. I know at least one person who does so. After all, you refer to yourself with two reclaimed slurs, so why not people who call themselves transsexuals?
I wouldn't hold it against anyone using it honestly for themselves.
No offense, it's like hearing "the" before an ethnicity or origin country. "The blacks in NYC" indicates you're going to have a totally different conversation than if it was "Blacks in NYC". And thus, all the more reason for solidarity. 💪
(BTW, thanks for the next D&D character I play 🙂)
Fuck yeah! Amazing post.