Drivebyhaiku @ Drivebyhaiku @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

773

Joined

2 yr. ago

There are actually different models of talking about sexuallity. The one most common that you know where there's stuff like gay, lesbian, bi... But when you have trans folks that doesn't nessisarily give much credence to genital preferences. It's more a reference to the cultural gender expectations. A cis man and a pre-medical trans man is still gay where a cis man and a trans woman in the same situation is straight... But when you are non-binary this model doesn't serve because if I am culturally neither male or female is me liking a specific presentation gay or straight? If you're defaulting to what my body type is then neither is correct. I am not pan or bi because I don't like both and I am not straight or gay because those things frame relationships between physical sexes not fitting neatly into the changing cultural landscape of gender.

The other less used model just describes what someone finds sexy. A gynophile is attracted to feminine presentation, androphiles like the masculine, Skoliophiles are into non-binary people and ambiphiles like all.

It is a little 4D chess but it's easier to pick up when you don't have to account for old rules.

There is something of a line between self-care and self-coddling. This is an example of active self care. Sometimes feeling better is a matter of building resistance to the desire to administer convenient but less enduring instant self gratification.

Maybe conceive of it as refusing to spoil your inner child who operates emotionally and not logically?

The difference between liberal and left is not fully capitalism dependant. It has more to do with lateral vs horizontal power structures. Liberal rhetoric tends to focus very much on personal property rights which means it basically is a machine to enable unchecked capitalism because it resists anything that would enable seizure or social checks on acquisition or regulation. It reinforces heirachy by legitimizing and protecting wealth and ensuring it snowballs creating greater inequity over time. Any check on what is considered personal property is anti-liberal to some extent.

There are actually liberal and social attitudes towards capitalism. Anti-trust measures, stock restrictions, union organization, reabsorbing privately held services and property into public trusts and services. These things exist as social counter measures to unchecked capitalism but not an attempt to explicitly remove the basic idea of investment capital existing in some form or another. The focus on decentralization of wealth agrigation and empowering labor still makes it nominally left of center.

Kind of imagining actual canned spiced ham when you said this. Like there's just a very large loop constructed of reconstituted pig out there stinking up the countryside.

Here's the thing. Medical regret has it's own feild of associated study. There are different causes to medical regret and there is no proceedure not immediately life saving you can take has a 0% regret rate. Hip and knee replacements for instance have a very high rate of regret.

Some of the key causes of regret are things like believing that there will be more function than you've been lead to hope, slower recovery rates and cosmetic issues arising from surgery.

Trans paitents are a unique demographic. By the time they reach the operating table they have likely been binding, packing, tucking, voice training and giving the operation exhaustive levels of thought. These acts cause "temporary" physical discomforts in themselves but they serve as a sort of training period to figure out if these are going to be viable long term wants. The cosmetic issues of scarring is less of a problem because those are things those paitents know what to expect.

As for issues of impaired function caused by surgical complications... Those risks are discussed at length with paitents beforehand in the lengthy consultation process. Some trans people elect to skip some surgeries in favor of allowing social acceptance of partial transitions to fill in the gaps.

Saying there's nobody ever who will regret a surgery is unrealistic. Removing a medical course of treatment with an incredibly low rate of post surgery regret - even among the paitent cohort who experience less than the ideal anticipated results... Isn't logical.

Consider if you will that pregnancy is a state of extreme vulnerability. The chances of being killed by a parter are astronomically higher for pregnant people... With the case of a lot of insurance, banking policies and economic infrastructure is designed to enable spouses to be treated as a single person any property you acquire is by default mutually owned meaning there's all manner of control which can be exerted by a spouse. You cannot file taxes separately and kinship treats your spouse as both your automatic inheritor and a legal authority with power of attorney in the event of you are incapacitated so you have someone that you cannot fully escape from because of legal ties. If you fear for your life from someone any contact is too much.

Considering too that it relatively common for men who were not previously abusive to suddenly change their personality, dropping their masks abruptly once someone is essentially trapped into having their baby then not giving someone the ability to extracate themselves from this situation is creating incentive to put on these deceptions. In the matter of childbearing the risk is borne only by one partner. It would stand to reason that if a non bearing partner causes an undue increase in the risks during the most vulnerable stages of pregnancy that they default on both their responsibilities and privileges as a parent.

Critically in a very short term divorce proceeding you do have to prove to a court cruelty or adultery which means obtaining reasonable proof these things exist. If your partner is proven cruel or a cheater then really are they worth defending their custody so vehemently? Most no fault divorce state requirements require a mutual separation period well beyond the gestation period of pregnancy (one year is the most common) . Even if you timed a separation so that you got pregnant right at the beginning of starting the clock that baby would be three months old before you would be eligible to divorce.

I find the pact of the denim warlock to be a superior class choice to the school ofJeanomancy wizard build.

I label all my attempts to organize my schedule "the gay agenda". Nobody has the time to convert the straights, we'd have to reschedule our D&D campaign night.

Aw beans.

An acronym is a word that when it's abbreviated you say aloud like it's a proper word. Take for instance Self Contained Underwater Breathing Aparatus... When you say it aloud it creates a word. Scuba.

Initnialisms are abbreviations that when you talk about them don't get turned into words but you spell them out by letter. Like FBI. You don't say something like "Ffffbee" cus it's kind of awkward. You refer to it by it's initials hence initialism.

Sometimes you get a weird distinction where something could be easily both but culture makes it one or the other like the World Health Oganization could have easily been an acronym but for clarity sake they chose to propagate it as the initialism. W. H. O.

Not fully defanged yet. Queer can still be used as a pejorative just like if someone said "That's so gay!" in the 90's schoolyard usage to synonym for dumb, uncool or bad... We did however make it kind of harder to pull off as a lot of the time unless you make your tone or context explicitly negative it just comes across as using it in a neutral way.

Yeah a lot of cis people really reject the term. Some don't like the way it sounds and wants to self identify with a word that they like more... A certain number stick to their guns in wanting to make sure that there is no word that is used for people who are not trans.

Sometimes they opt for wanting to be called "normal" without realizing that there is a value judgement implicit in that word. If you have a "normal man" and a "trans man" you are saying that transness is abnormal, pathologizing gender. You reach the same effect by omission of a word. If there is a man and a trans man then one of these things is assumed standard and the other the deviation.

Of course they don't see a problem with this because under that model they personally don't take on the psychological burden of constantly having to referring to oneself by terminology reserved for either the deviant or somehow inferior. To those unused to questioning their centrally held power the idea of just having a word to describe them in relation to others is seen as an oppression.

If enough people disliked the term cis they could band together and just come up with another value neutral word....That's basically how we arrived at the less science centric terms for other sexuallities like "gay" as an example. "Homosexual" being a relatively new classification wasn't exactly loved by the people to whom it was applied to beyond their consent as it sounded clinical. Other euphemisms had always existed but gay was purposely adopted as a synonym by the queer community.

I don't think there would be objection from the trans community long as the term synonymous for cis was essentially was not trying to imply that it is somehow the default state of being.

Think of the potential slang we are missing out on!

Also the thing is just steeped in trans metaphor. Consider the agents deadnaming Neo throughout as "Mister Anderson" Ander being intended as the same word part as Androgens, Androgyny or Misandry... Mister Ander Son. The system keeps reinforcing his identity as Man man man.

Go listen back through Morpheus's speech just before he offers a red and blue pill (back in the 90's horomone treatments for trans women came in the form of little red pills)... It's a sci-fi parable for gender roles and dysphoria. Of being forced into a system where oppression isn't seen or heard or touched because almost nobody recognizes it. Only some nebulous but insistant feeling causes you to want to break free, to explore yourself.

And once you break free you no longer have the protection from the system. The system sees you as a threat. You must accept less resources and support outside of whatever small found family and resistance you gather.

Like all scifi parables some of it's metaphor plays second fiddle to making the technical premise work from a narrative perspective...but whenever they start talking about the Matrix consider they are actually saying "The Bioessentialist construct of gender" and you can see a lot of the different facets behind deliberate creative choices.

In part. The other half is that Conservatives started courting Evengelical groups to make voting for them the "correct" thing to do. Abortion legalization was championed by the left but the Catholic Church had some remaining abstention held over by essentially a political decision that had been cannonized as an official spiritual stance on the idea of the soul. Conservatives tend to think like marketing experts and they know abortion and the nature of the soul is a core belief not easily shaken thus they were able to make their platform a matter of "life and death" harnessing the empathy people had for the idea of babies... Very specifically the idea of babies, the soft squishy humans whom we are programmed instinctually to protect.

It also dovetailed nicely into purity doctrine. The idea you are enabling the sexual deviancey of loose women... The idea that a fetus is a souless empty blob as the majority idea was for the first thousand years of Christianity got in the way of the advertising campaign and the Catholic Church wasn't about to roll back the precedent decision it has upheld for centuries. That would make the idea seem kind of arbitrary... and once you start unpicking the history of Catholic control measures it weakens the vwey idea of them as a spiritual authority.

Part of the issue with many religions is that they exists in multiple components. There is

• the religion as the nebulous idea of a culture as adopted by word of mouth generational teaching.
• religion as depicted and codified by a holy script.
• the popculture adoptions of religion through time that become traditionally indistinct.
• the branches of philosophical thought inside the religion changing the window of interpretation and creating schisms
• The economic and power structures involved in maintaining physical sites of worship and a guiding priesthood.
• The political stances the powers inside the religious complex adopt to adapt to specific historical events.

These different factors are generally all at play though there are exceptions like some religions do not have a holy text or sites of worship for instance. Religions are kind of aggregates of time, tradition and thought and distorted by time as well. For instance linguistic and technological drift makes it very hard to appropriately understand a text in it's proper context. Like David and Goliath becomes a very different story when you understand that a sling weilded appropriately is like firing a pistol at short range.

Christianity is kind of a mess in the concept of time. A lot of belief brought into Christianity predated it. Hell for instance predates Christianity (it is not explicitly mentioned in the text but was passed down linguistically) and the conception of it borrowed off of Buddhist, Norse and Grecco/Roman ideas of the underworld. Other things like the Seven Deadly Sins, Lucifer, Monastic living and so on were often inventions of single people who essentially just started fads. Priesthoods have always been tied into concepts of authority through study and internal structures around property. Becoming an abbot was basically just another way to gain the ruling autonomy of nobility for land use. The political structure inside the Church has changed it's relationship with things out of fear as well. The idea of abortion as murder is tracable to the black death when priests worried that a population collapse would cause disaster for society so it changed it's teaching from the concept of "ensoulment" and being very abortion neutral to facilitating a literal witchunt destroying existing systems of female led midwifery to gain reproductive control.

Christianity has at some level always been about power, control and resources... But there are also multiple Christianities. For instance a person who reads the book but rejects the church or the built up dogma of traditions is still a Christian. You can also adopt just the institution or the popculture understanding of Christianity and still be a Christian. Adopting every peice of a religion is itself optional.

The problem being is that understanding the text and history requires a lot of effort, intellectual savvy and time in study. Just like the medieval times people tend to get their understanding from people who did that work for them (or say they did) to supply the missing context. A lot of the time people accept whatever "feels" right and people also tend to be self centric. Feeling superior by category of beliefs we have been handed is something we are all potentially susceptible to.

I managed to check some of your sources before they went and a lot of them are lingering parental reporting of social contagion theory which has been a disproven method of scientific data collection for outcomes of patients... or based out of the UK where the Gender clinic situation has been decried as a mess by trans people because there are far too few clinics to service the needs of the trans population at large so issues of misconduct are being caused to sheer volume issues - something trans people in the UK are fighting tooth and nail to rectify. These articles while holding sources are linking to other articles that have purposefully ommited contexts or discredited scientific studies at their core and its worth actually drilling down.

For a starter insider look at what it's like to be in the UK system as an adult along with the structural issues and trans issues as unique to the UK I recommend https://youtu.be/v1eWIshUzr8?si=55znLlcRupaE3SuJ

The sources off that video are genuinely good and the presenter is very engaging and funny. It's a long video but I think worth a watch.

Fucking hells they called you "it"?! I am really sorry you had to experience that. Where I am she would be lucky to keep her job.

Sometimes people's veiws on abortion are dearly held and we can ask only that they not inflict those beliefs on others.

This person, despite their stance on abortion, seems at least fairly progressive on their stance on trans people. Maybe not a gold star of support yes but was coming after them undermining them for the general state of the church in regards to gender minorities ultimately nessisary? This habit of individual members of a faith getting shoved on the back foot having to defend all of Christianity simultaneously for beliefs they don't personally hold is a way to express your distaste of organized religion... But Scapegoating isn't pleasant to be on the receiving end of.

I recommend it. Experiencing that kind of temporality made me realize how much the mass adoption of clocks impacts our experiences. I never expected the degree to which I would pay more attention to the people around me.

It is still something I see very often levied at members of this community who don't deserve it. It is so very common for people who have a history of just mentioning their faith in the same breath as their support of trans people getting completely dog piled on by people who having sighted a believer to decide to try and debate their faith and hurl abuse.

More generally I wish people would realize what they are actually doing when they are doing that.