Free Allegiance Forums

itt: first world problems

girlyboy wrote:QUOTE (girlyboy @ Feb 14 2012, 07:49 AM) P. S.: Actually, the fella on the right in the picture is pretty close to how I imagine Vortrog, though it may just be because of his sig...

Sexy and I know it! The Borat of Star Trek!

girlyboy wrote:QUOTE (girlyboy @ Feb 13 2012, 03:59 PM) If someone says "I am a man, that is how I want to be treated," why isn't that enough?

I am a genius and that's how I want to be treated. You will now accept everything I say as the ultimate word on any subject.

^ In what way is that comparable?

I don't feel like writing another essay, but this really makes no sense to me at all, once again (NORMAN, COORDINATE!) Being a man is not like being a genius. It's a matter of personal identity on which the person in question themselves is best qualified to offer an opinion; unlike the status of "genius," there's no particular reason I can see that it should depend on what others think of you or your abilities, or whether you can pass some test, or accomplish some task, or whatever else. If you do see a reason for this, could you elaborate? Because I don't.

It's hard for me to come up with a good analogy here, actually -- what is being a man like? To most people gender is a fundamental aspect of their selves, and a very personal one, I think. To some extent this is also a biological, natural feeling -- for someone who's trans, a mis-match between what your brain is telling you you are, and your body. On the other hand, with how much emphasis gender differences have in the culture we all grow up in, that doubtlessly plays a role too.

Maybe one analogy could be religion? Not discussed from my usual agnostic/atheistic-ish perspective, but taken as an identity that seems fundamental to many people. It's like if you had deep personal faith that was, to you, an essential part of who you are, and you tell someone you have personal faith in god, and someone else tells you that no, as a matter of fact, you don't, and you have to pass this test of faith in this holy book (if she weighs the same as a duck... and she floats...) and be judged by your peers as to your faith-having-ness, and if you fail you must actually be an atheist, regardless of what you say. And therefore will be treated like one, which may be a big deal depending on where you live. Or vice versa, you say you are an atheist, and that's just what you are, but someone else asks you a bunch of questions about your life and your morals, and based on your answers declares that you're actually Orthodox Christian, and carts you off to church.

... Probably not a good analogy at all, really, but it's probably closer than the "I'm a genius" bit in terms of being a matter of personal identity, at least.

... I'm sleepy.

I feel it's kind of inappropriate for me to be writing slap-like essays about all this, really. At the end of the day it's not an abstract problem of some sort, but more a matter of, to get back to the original thingy, that maybe it's wrong to chain people up and abuse them because they look weird to someone due to not fitting into sex and gender roles the way that someone thinks they should.

Hate when bastard cops give cops like me a bad name. I hope if the allegations are true, they're JAILED for their misconduct.


In our jail, we house males only, and we transfer our females to the next county over. If a transgendered female is identifying as a male... 'he' will still be shipped out to the next county, because we will NOT put a person with a different genitalia into the secured areas with other males. It would start WAY too many problems. Likewise, if a male is identifying as a female, 'she' will still be housed in our facility, and NOT transferred. This has in fact happened once already.

For lack of a better explanation... it really does depend on what is still 'under the hood.'

... That's worrisome... I'd worry about the safety of a transgendered woman getting housed with men. Especially since, as I understand it, we're talking about long-term jailing, not a day or two for processing for minor offences like in the story.

I'm assuming this is out of your hands, and you're just following the established rules, but I think those rules are wrong. If someone identifies as a woman, and they have to spend who-knows-how-long in jail with men, and being treated like a man, that's pretty depressing. Whether they're a convicted criminal or not, that's just a basic case of unjust treatment. Also, while presumably people like you are keeping an eye on the situation to prevent abuse... You probably can't prevent every single case of verbal and physical abuse 24/7 in an environment like that, and you're still housing a woman in a jail with men. And a woman who is probably especially vulnerable to abuse, and especially likely to become a target for abuse, given how common transphobia is. You're saying the alternative would cause "too many problems," but the current situation you describe seems like one big giant problem to me already.

Also, regardless of what is "still under the hood" as you put it, a trans-woman (i.e. a woman who has a Y chromosome and was born with a physically male body) is still a woman, not "a man, identifying as a woman"; and there's no need to put "she" in scare quotes, etc. <Shrug> I don't want to come across as a jerk towards you, as I'm sure you are a "good cop" who genuinely cares about issues like the abuse and mistreatment of prisoners (at first I wanted to write another rant in this post... >_< Probably would not have been very helpful). And given that, I'm happy at least there are people like you in the system where you work, as opposed to the abusive sort of people in the original news story. But this is more a case of the whole system being depressingly wrong (while in the original news story, conversely, the cops were @#$%@#s in a place where the law actually was clearly on the side of the transgendered person). One can only hope someday in the not-too-distant future it will change through legislative or judicial action. ... Though if it's an area where culture as a whole tends to be socially conservative, that seems kind of unlikely, sadly.

and if a man identifies as a woman and is placed in with women there's no telling whether or not it would be a better situation for them, because women are just as likely to ostracize and abuse a transgendered male identifying as female than men are, or vice versa

^ There's always the potential for abuse, and there will be until culture as a whole changes to be more accepting of transgendered and transsexual people. I still think there's probably less potential for abuse if you actually send her to the proper prison. This prisoner will at least be able to actually live as a woman and openly identify as a woman; if she tried doing that in a men's prison, I think the other prisoners would just take that as an excuse to be even more abusive. So I think there's still a big difference between the alternatives. Put them in a cell on their own, separately from the cis-gendered women, if necessary. That would probably reduce abuse, at least. I wonder if Sundance_'s prison is at least doing that, incidentally?

Also, at least you'd be respecting the person's self-identified gender. By showing that you will, in fact, put a transgendered woman with other women, not with men, at least you're showing that in the eyes of the state she really is, in fact, a woman, and that is the kind of step that, hopefully, may (slowly, eventually) help lead to a cultural shift. The alternative that Sundance_'s system is following right now is basically saying, really loudly, that in the eyes of the state, a trans-woman is just a "man, identifying as a woman." Hard to imagine many things changing while that's the official position.

Alright, I'm reaching my limit as to how far I can be lured over to the liberal side of things. When I was younger I had VERY conservative views, but they've changed as I've gotten older and had more life experience. But there are limits. I am SO tired of this country and everybody worrying about every little minority group and making sure everybody bends over backwards to make sure they are treated exactly as they wish to be treated. If these minorities aren't treated EXACTLY as they describe, then there's hell to pay. America: Land of the Offended.

I'm sorry, if you have a penis, you're a man. If you have a vagina, you are a woman. If you claim otherwise, you have a mental disorder. That's how I see it. It's nothing to be ashamed of, just as there is no shame in having any other health issue. It's nothing to laugh about or poke fun at, but it's also not something I feel our country should just accept as normal and healthy. Being a man or a woman isn't a choice. It's a biological mandate. I think Freebeer said it best. You can say you're whatever the hell you want to say you are, but that doesn't make it true.

This country is going to hell in a handbasket. At one point do we draw the line between "choice" and "mental disease?" If a person claims he's a duck, do we then set up legislature to protect his duck status? The man's claiming he's a duck, people. Who are you to argue? girly, you're gonna say that this is SO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT and berate me for being a closed minded, insensitive jerk. But before you do, answer this: Why is the man not a duck? Because he doesn't look like a duck? Because he is, in fact, a man? Because being a duck instead of a man isn't a choice?

Now substitute "duck" with "woman." This is not to say women are ducks (this is another debate entirely), but that's all I'm trying to say.

bacon when we can turn people into ducks transduckism will become a thing, i promise