178
submitted 2 weeks ago by Eyekaytee@aussie.zone to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Ekybio@lemmy.world 67 points 2 weeks ago

Reality and science disagree, but whatever.

Truth doesnt mean a thing to people full of hate...

[-] Wanderer@lemm.ee 26 points 2 weeks ago

That's bullshit.

The rules obviously got set up with a specific definition that was understood at the time. Changing the definition after makes no sense. It changes what the rule was about in the first place.

There are still laws about trans people.

[-] overload@sopuli.xyz 24 points 2 weeks ago

Makes sense. I think it's possible to hold this belief and still be pro-trans rights. There's literally not a limit on the number of laws we can have, seems silly to change what a legal woman is rather than include transgender women people as an additional group that these laws can apply to.

[-] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 1 points 2 weeks ago

I would be interested to hear trans’ users opinions on whether they view themselves and/or prefer to be treated as literally the same as the other biological gender, or something different.

E.g., male-to-female trans folks, do you hold that there is only one kind of woman and you are no different from those born as women?

Or do you think that transgender people have a fundamentally different experience, and thus trans women are a little different category of women?

I don’t mean any offense by the question, I’d really just like to know how people see themselves.

[-] Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

rules obviously got set up with a specific definition that was understood at the time

Oh boi, having studied law, i can confidently say that using words with no clear definition in laws and trying to apply them is one of the main problematic and debate fuel of judges and lawyers.

And "man/woman" are clearly not words with one specific definition, even in the past (maybe people cared less about the definition, but it does not make it more specific).

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

But this isn't about changing a definition, it's about expanding recognition to a previously mischaracterised portion of the population.

If racoons were at one point considered to be cats but now we know they're actually much closer related to bears than anything else, are we changing the definition of "cat" and "bear"?

[-] LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Trans people are just people. It's like saying "there are still laws about black people" in the Jim Crow South.

Laws should be written to be inclusive, not exclusive. When laws are written in these fragmented ways it is the exact purpose of right wingers to exploit them. It is written to SERVE THE POWER OF OPPRESSION.

This is the same as "gay people can have civil partnerships". While ignoring that it is literally just a method used to exclude gay partners of the same rights married partners have.

It's the same "separate but equal" bull shit that has existed over and over. I don't know how "well intentioned liberals" keep falling for this same trick over and over again throughout our history.

The rules on "sex" are entirely based on social definitions of gender norms. Or tell me you would be confused by seeing this guy walk through TSA with F as his sex.

https://www.olympics.com/en/news/transgender-boxer-pat-manuel-makes-history-with-first-professional-win

Edit: I really should not have to use "passing" trans people to make my point. But I feel like people live in a different reality where every ID check is followed up with a genital inspection.

this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2025
178 points (98.9% liked)

World News

46263 readers
4691 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS