Due to field size limits, I use the term "transgenders" to refer to "transgender people" and there are intentional typos in the list items. Your vote selections are private (not publicly viewable).
Hard to answer the questions. The word "should" can be interpreted as "if you don't do this, you will be canceled" or "it would be nice if this was done, but it's up to individuals to decide for themselves", or something in between.
I don't like pronoun thing or gender redefinitions but it seems like the bare minimum. I don't think the current interpretations fit so it's hard to ask society to change without certainty. There's an ableist movement to restrict words like r****d and some have gone further with trying to strike bananas. I strongly hope words will continue to evolve but the irony is that it would ideally flow better with dialogue among people mostly in good faith and without the fear of censorship through oppressive shaming. People love talking about the censorship angle because free speech is a moral pillar liberals one frequently used to feel better about themselves, but the lack of trust for every other group has made good faith dialogue a trench fight. It saps each other's will and makes both parties shoot across each other without seeing their positions for what they are. There's something telling that in a debate that can be focused upon the dignity of an oppressed group, that neither political side will afford each other the same dignity as broader groups of people. Anyhow, I'm not going to touch the locker room or sports stuff as it's discussed in the other thread. I did vote for the two more funding options. Coming out as trans in America is still a debilitating event that's not one off and still an "edge case" for laws, rules, and regulations. People dead set against trans folk competing in the sports leagues or bathrooms of their preference should realize these are tangential effects from what happened at the highest legal levels. The reasons why being fully trans is a financial millstone are: Parents and family cuts you off unless you do and act what they tell you to do (societal edge case) Operation and therapy is expensive (still an incomplete field) Employee Insurance plans still mostly don't cover those medical costs unless HR specifically adds them at a higher premium (legal and bureaucratic edge case) Without full coverage, consequences from mental and social instability are magnified Rejecting the entire notion of trans as "too woke" is like an ostrich doing what it does while dreaming of better simpler days. I don't think vilifying the other group with ridicule or sarcasm works in societal or personal discourse. I grew up watching Dawkins be a pompous prick to Christians because he self righteously believed enabling his attitude would make a difference. It was also the dawn of Jon Stewart's Daily Show which was cathartic but did nothing to change how we treat each other other than spawning a medium of comedy that's more tragic and heavily corporatized. Can't offend fatties, women, disabled, etc... Then make fun of your neighbor for their dumbass individual choices as the problem in Washington. Gay rights mostly shifted when more people one knew came out as gay. Whom were affected came across party lines. It forced people to try to understand more in their context then talk about it with other people going through theirs. What you feel now about trans will ultimately change, though I think you're more likely to dig deep if the debate forms as some perverse challenge or litmus test about who you are or what America will be. Why frame it like that...Trans movement will likely evolve itself and hopefully bring out a more definitive picture, one that's less loaded and attached to current norms.
Cry, little CISter (Thou shall not fall) Come, come to your brother (Thou shall not die) Unchain me, CISter (Thou shall not fear) Love is with your brother (Thou shall not kill)
Yeah - the survey has a character limit on the options. I would have liked to have been more clear, but space just didn't allow.
I voted for the first, second and third. I look at the first as just being common courtesy of addressing someone as they would choose to be addressed. For example I would prefer not to be called “ Oriental” but I know some older people still use that term. It would be rude to call someone who was Asian “Oriental” if they didn’t like it. Im fine with transgender using restrooms and lockers of their preferred gender. They doesn’t excuse them or anyone else from harassing others. Further as an architect we’re working on addressing this with use of larger and more Private bathroom stalls. As I said in the other thread I don’t think trans athletes are the problem that people think they are. Having coached a trans athlete it would be pretty hypocritical of me to now say that she shouldn’t have been allowed to compete. For the rest I’m not for someone changing their identity and then claiming minority status and benefits. The Rachael Dolezal situation. Under the right to free association I wouldn’t compel gender specific organizations to accept trans. That would go to sports leagues as while I’m personally for allowing them to compete would defer to the leagues. I think having adolescents and younger taking gender reassignment hormones and surgery is risky. I wouldn’t ban them outright but would encourage counseling first.
No no, that's not what I said. Like I have stated many times, everyone should be free to identify as whatever and live their life as they please. But almost all the options in the poll place a burden on everyone else one way or another, and I don't think that is warranted. Two small exceptions, some nuance the poll responses didn't allow for: - after a full transition or where a female-to-male transgender wants to use the "identified" gender's facilities - fine - private scholarships etc. - of course, fine
I dunno, seems like a lot of our resident conservative posters can find an immediate boner by posting about this.
I don't think the government should categorize people, so #1 only. Even there, it would just be that it is considered polite, there shouldn't be consequences for not doing it besides being thought a jerk. Like I know a guy whose name is Frederick, but he goes by his middle name (Phil). Because that is what he wants to be called, that's what I call him. No one should be fired or jailed if they call him Fred though. 3 and 4 would be determined by whatever organization or entity is providing the bathroom, locker room, or athletic competition. I think trans people can have an advantage in sports, so if I had my own MMA promotion I wouldn't allow it, but that is just my personal view.
