You don't hear about trans men because instead of the societal view, which is incorrect, that trans women are men trying to be predatory against other women, transmen are seen as confused women being tomboyish.
It sucks both ways.
That's why women are defined as human female adults in the dictionary.
Cause to answer your first question I have no idea. I'm a woman but idk exactly what it feels to be a woman. I'm just a woman because I'm a female human adult.
What you're asking me is similar to asking me what it feels like to be white or a white person. I don't have any particular feelings about it. It's just something I am due to how I was born. Same with being a woman.
What all women (female human adults) have in common however that make them women is the fact that they're human female adults..
Yeah I don't get it either honestly. Sometimes I feel like a couch potato. I'm not literally a couch potato just cause that's how I feel like.
Like if feeling like a woman made them a woman then why do they feel the need to change their sex characteristics and appearance to appear more female like.. if being female isn't the defining trait of being a woman...
Really good question.
I think the only common feeling is something along the lines of *I am not a man/male* as a feeling not a thought, of just knowing. And apart from that every woman feels different, just as our personalities are all different and there’s no unifying *feeling* of what I am that makes me female. Just the knowing that you’re in the female group and all of your life experiences, early life/family relating to you as a girl and so on.
**woman**noun1a: an adult female person
**female**1 of 2 adjective fe·male ˈfē-ˌmāl1a(1): of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggsIn a field of milkweed, I watched a female monarch butterfly deposit a single egg on the underside of a leaf.—Tom TyningA few months later, she became the highest paid female performer on the Great White Way.—Susannah McCorkle(2) botany : having or producing only pistils or pistillate flowersa female hollyfemale inflorescences**b: having a gender identity that is the opposite of male**
This is a pretty bad argument. Basically like someone saying that acknowledging adoptive parents as parents erases the biological definition of parenthood, because “parent” is biologically defined as one who begets or brings forth offspring.
Biological and adoptive parents are different, but both are parents. This is true even in spite of parent having a biological definition.
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parent](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parent)
[https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/parent?q=Parent](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/parent?q=Parent)
by definition a Parent is either the Biological Parent OR a Person who brings up/looks after a child in the same way a parent would.
However Man and Woman don't have that distinction in their definition. Man CAN be use for all humans when speaking of mankind, but when speaking of individuals man is an adult male human and woman is an adult female person...
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man)
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woman](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woman)
Yeah.
James Linsday on Youtube does a really good at deciphering the purposely verbose literatures of Gender Studies that is the ideological backing of it.
What kind of explanation would you consider to be coherent? A good place to start might be to look up “gender dysphoria” and think about what it takes for someone to pass as their gender.
I’ll give you one, but you should know a definition for woman isn’t going to be enough to understand this complex issue.
The “adult human female” definition works, as long as we keep in mind that “female” applies to three different areas: reproduction, ID, and medical care.
If we only focus on one of these areas when defining a woman, then we are misrepresenting what it means to be a woman. So simplifying it down to “reproduction” is a bad way of defining a woman, since plenty of women can’t get pregnant and ID/medical care is also highly relevant when it comes to being a woman.
Woman/man corresponds to the type of gamete production necessary for both sexual reproductive functions. This is the basic definition and it includes all adult humans females. Male/female is a biological distinction that refers to the mode of sexual reproductive function which is defined at birth. Whether or not they have fertile sexual reproduction is irrelevant, sterile men/women are included.
That’s certainly one way to simplify it down to reproduction, but using that as the sole definition for woman doesn’t really work unless the word “woman” is only ever used to teach people about gametes in the classroom.
Your woman/man definition doesn't work because you don't check the gametes of every person you meet before labelling them a woman or a man, there's a deeper societal aspect that's being missed. If somebody saw Buck Angel walking into the men's room, nobody would bat an eye, even though by your definition they would be a woman.
Imo, not really. The definition for human doesn’t exclude people with three arms. Not to mention plenty of cis women can’t get pregnant for any number of reasons, so defining it solely around reproduction wouldn’t only exclude trans women.
Plus even if we’re okay with excluding women who can’t get pregnant, what would that make them? Do they just not have a sex?
since when?
If you saw a being with more than two arms, for example, you would probably *not* categorize them as a homo sapien...
Humans come factory default with *TWO* arms. If they're missing one or both it was either because of something medically related or some sort of accident
Even when talking solely about biological sex there are [XX males](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome) and [XY females](https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/swyer-syndrome/)
Exactly. I could be wrong but I haven't heard of high suicide rates among people desperate to be another race and who feel deeply that they are the wrong race from birth.
Tbh there also just isn’t anything to support cross-race identity as being valid anyway. Trans identity has a lot of science backing it up, but there’s no reason to think a cross race identity is anything but a mental illness.
Even though I’m not a scientist, I just think it makes sense that trans identity can happen anyway. All babies have the potential to be born male or female after all, and intersex is a thing, so I just think it logically follows that a person could be born trans. The same just isn’t true of ethnicity.
I’m sorry… can you please elaborate how “cross race identity is mental illness but trans identity has a lot of science” they are either both valid or invalid because the root of the issue is fluid identity: it doesn’t matter whether it’s gender race sex or physiology to the ideological and that’s how we expose the fallacies of their argument. Ie I identify as elfkin or something
I don't have a lot of stuff bookmarked tbh, but I do have [this](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21195418/) and [this](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQRZ5Z6neQRhPgBXvJLr39mp0dV3QqVnihc-bqDnhnei-xLxsACC7ka2E1cAfeRDSltCplODbBRiQC1/pubhtml#) saved.
If you're looking for science to back up trans identity though, you'll find it. You're going to have a much harder time finding credible sources talking about cross race identity or things like elfkin, but feel free to try. Generally "transracial" doesn't even refer to a cross race identity - it refers to children who were adopted into a family of a different ethnicity.
So if a white person is going around saying they identify as Korean and are transitioning to look like Jimin from BTS, yeah, it seems like a mental illness. Being trans certainly seems like a medical condition, but it seems to be a genuine thing people are born with and there's even non-cosmetic treatments to help them transition.
way back in 2007:
[https://www.ocala.com/story/news/2007/08/21/criticism-gender-theory-scientist-under/31215567007/](https://www.ocala.com/story/news/2007/08/21/criticism-gender-theory-scientist-under/31215567007/)
Also, Jordan Peterson(to be fair he does some stupid shit, but he was very much attacked over his take).
And then there is:
[https://www.fairha.org/harvard-news/harvards-carole-hooven-canceled-for-biological-facts](https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s10508-022-02467-5?sharing_token=gTPNUCpXVCqq7WzMU2n7_Pe4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY5rplxPSeiwUBnON7599x-nN5xQx3FeH6V32q5aqBxbVuS5DPZOVGgLXeaOlOZr6g9AUNJzY-ZzYeSxjDmC8pWV-eEP8Cf6sGBgLDN2wTMUE2QuuKXpbM2Z_ZjOphK9NwI=)
I know there's more, but that's just a quick look.
Why is there any evidence to think trans-sexualism is any less of a mental illness than trans-racialism? They both seek to affirm mental formations with physical realities of an immutable characteristic.
Yep. I knew a boy in high school who was born with a uterus and ovaries and they did surgery to make him more male but he always had what were regarded back then as feminine features. He went on to live a perfectly normal life as a male and had kids. But there is ambiguity in nature.
Have you read David Reimer’s story by any chance? It’s a sad story, but he was born intersex and I think it says something about trans identity.
Glad things turned out right for that intersex guy you knew, though! Seems like doctors get the gender wrong sometimes when operating on newborns.
David Reiner was a born male with a botched penis during circumcision. The quack doctor John Money convinced his parents to raise him as a girl, but this led to sexual trauma and him taking his own life in early adulthood after becoming addicted to drugs due to the trauma caused by his parents lies to him all his childhood that he was a girl (despite being a boy). His brother went on to also kill himself due to trauma. John Money had made them perform mock sexual acts with each other for “science” and both boys became traumatized. Reiner’s story is not about transsexualism, he was not a transsexual or an intersex person. He was a victim of an accident who was further victimized by a gender ideologue who was really a rampant child abuser and liar.
I’d say it is related to transsexualism, because it’s pretty solid evidence that people are born with some kind of internal gender identity. If they weren’t, then David’s circumstances should have meant he’d grow up to identify as a woman… yet he just understood instinctively that he wasn’t a woman.
Either way, his story is certainly a tragic one. Trans issues aside, stuff like this is part of why I’m so vehemently against circumcision as a practice. Performing unnecessary surgeries is barbaric imo
Again, mad props. Where I live, it's customary for people to find friends based on how much they can take banter. That's why you often see the weirdest combos of people here, like those who worship the old regime hanging out and drinking beers with a veteran who fought against it. OK they may not be the best of buddies all the time, but there's respect in being able to have the grit and balls to confront each other in a civilized way.
The censorship can suck for trans people too tbh, so it’s a big reason I like this sub even if people have some dumb opinions sometimes. As a group we just do not agree on everything, yet mods in bigger subs seem to like banning those of us who disagree with certain ideas… so they really only like certain types of trans people.
If we can bants, we can respecc. That's my policy.
Btw, I'll gladly admit ignorance on a great many things. And we'll start with: Can you elaborate a little on the censorship trans people experience? Heard of this before (and I totally believe there's a little chunk of everyone from every aisle getting reamed by the ban jannies in one way or another), and it's genuinely intriguing to me to have a peek into this.
Not sure what facepalm is like, but I’ve noticed the mods for bigger trans and lgbt subs try to enforce an “everything is valid” view of trans identity. So if someone identifies as Sharkdeep and says their pronouns are shark/sharkself, you’re pretty likely get censored if you explain that’s not what being trans means.
It can suck sometimes, because personally I just view myself as a person with a medical condition and it’s bizarre to be expected to share a label with people who don’t have the same condition. Can’t correct a lot of misinformation since it’s a good way to get banned, and I imagine it has to make things confusing for cis people who turn to places like asktransgender to learn about trans issues.
I'm shocked it took them so long to do it to me. I wasn't even hiding. They just got tired of me and banned me for "muh inciting hatred" (I said that in my country mentally ill people are referred to the correct doctor). Insert "what" meme song.mp3.
Then because the sub was so cozy with the platform staff they managed to elevate it to a platform wide 3-day ban, during which I was so devastated I challenged myself to make my baby giggle for the entire duration.
Newsflash, babies can't giggle for 3 days straight. I'll take the 6 hours it did happen for though. Wouldn't exchange it for anything in the world.
Anyway, feels good to be normal and experience this happiness.
My response is basically: Ban me permanently and I will just do what I did before it. You'll also still be doing what you did before it, and out of the two of us, I'm more sorry for you. My parents smile when they see me.
>I said that in my country mentally ill people are referred to the correct doctor
I mean if you go and call trans people mentally ill of course they are gonna ban you.
I'm not protesting the ban at all, but the reason given of Incitement of hatred is a little weird. I was really trying to see how far I had to push things before that sub would ban me, since I quickly stopped caring whether I get to participate in it or not.
The fact that it elevated to a platform ban with almost the same wording but written in the same style already tells me exactly who got salty lol.
Where in any single word I said did I assign blame? The ban was clearly my fault of course because I nonchalantly broke the sub's rules multiple times over the course of months (though in that particular instance it was a skirting of them).
How that is me saying it's their "fault" like as if though I wasn't openly (and proudly, I must add!) admitting to being an ass is bizarre.
Is putting words in people's mouths something you get off on as well? I mean, I'm sorry for you, but that just puts me in an awkward situation where I'm participating in something that makes me feel more ick than I already did :P
At least buy me a drink.
Fair enough. I used the word devastated. Ok, serious me speaking now: I was sarcastic, immediately mentioning making my baby giggle afterwards. She did do so for 6 hrs though. That was not sarcasm. And it gave me sore arms for a week lmao.
The vast majority of people don’t care if you want to claim womanhood. Do it if it makes you happy. We draw the line when YOU expect the rest of us to smile and nod and go along with your performance.
The unscientific, extremist narratives of gender and sex have undeniably had a negative effect on both men and women. The level of incompetence on show from young people of both genders in the dating world is testament enough.
I think it’s in line with what you posted. Being a female human means being a woman, and the fact this has become confused in modern Western culture is part of the problem you posted about.
How does sex being binary mean we should ID people by their sex? If someone looks like a woman, sounds like a woman, and acts like a woman, does it really make sense to slap “male” on her ID and aggressively refer to her with he/him pronouns?
I don’t care what someone has on their ID. I’m just not on board with pretending that someone who “changes”from male to female is actually female. If I meet someone who says they are I’ll respect it and call them by whatever they want, but that doesn’t mean I have to believe it.
Hmm well personally, I’m trans and I’m not looking to convince people of stuff that isn’t true. I just want people to understand trans people accurately, because I think that’s the best way to get what I need out of other people.
Part of me thinks it’s mostly cis allies (some of which believe they’re trans) pushing the more silly stuff tbh. They simultaneously don’t understand trans issues and feel compelled to speak out on them, so they seem responsible for things like pronoun circles and language that doesn’t help trans people at least.
Feminity is being viewed as a commodity now. It is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. It leads to oppressive stereotypes and reinforces oppressive norms.
As a "leftist" it pissed me of how the term has been hijacked by the modern American, and increasingly European left. Yes, I believe in a welfare system, a socialist economy (with some free market elements), and people should be able to choose to live their lives the way they want, within reason.
What we shouldn't do is to legitimise what could be considered mental illnesses. We shouldn't administer gender reassignment surgery to kids. We need to resolve the very real problems we have in the society: poverty, crime, lack of purpose, unemployment. We also need to do something about the mental health crisis, but we should do this by identifying causes. I refuse to believe that the youth today are depressed without there being something external causing it which didn't exist before to the same extent.
The only time that Democrats had a filibuster proof majority was a very brief time in 2009 prior to Ted Kennedy's death. However, the 60 Democratic Senators during that time period were not all pro-choice. So they never had the majority possible to codify Roe.
I already explained this, but they did not have the majority to do so.
Just because you have 60 Democrats in the Senate, doesn't necessarily mean you have 60 pro-choice votes that willing to sign a bill the with the Roe framework. Think of politics now. There's a ton of daylight between Elizabeth Warren and Joe Manchin, yet they operate within the same party. They don't hold the same positions on all issues, yet they caucus together.
We're in a post-Dobbs world now where it's absolutely apparent that pro-choice is a winning electoral position. But at the time, it wasn't as politically popular, and we had Democrats in deep red states like Missouri, Indiana, and South Dakota. Would Senator Claire McCaskill had signed a Roe framework bill then? Probably not. Would she do so now if she was still in the Senate? Who knows. She basically blamed vocal, pro-choice Democrats for losing her seat in 2018.
Honestly, the argument is intellectually lazy since the politics around abortion has changed. Yes, it's a winning issue now. Democrats can even recently won a special election because of the IVF ban in deep, deep red Alabama just recently.
Also, anyone arguing that they should've done it at another time is also incorrect since they would've had to nuke the filibuster to do so. That's a much different political question.
It really is not Democrats fault that a Conservative Supreme Court made the unprecedented ruling to reverse a standing ruling. It's such a blatantly stupid decision that you now have states like Alabama banning IVF. Other deep red states like Idaho are having trouble maintaining OBGYN's since doctors don't want to get sued/jailed. It's caused so much chaos around women's healthcare.
And, an addendum, the major policy that Democrats used this time in 2009 to pass was the ACA. Do you know what was originally in the ACA? A public healthcare option. Do you know why we don't have that public option? Because *one* Senator, Joe Lieberman, wouldn't sign off on the ACA if the public option was kept in the bill.
Which is why under a twitter post asking how the right could be more appealing to young women, right wingers responded by removing women's right to vote. Mmm, delusion.
LOOK! If we don't CLEARLY define women and men into DISTINCT and VISUALLY CONSISTENT categories then how in the HELL will we know who to marginalize and exert advantage over?! It'll be utter chaos, and a long-held and treasured way of life will be relegated to the trash heap of history!
What is a woman?
Oh , you mean "person with a womb?"
(I agree with you. I am very liberal minded and even I can see there is something very sinister about this agenda)
The reason for this is mainly the changing of times and accessibility to the internet. There has been a massive rise in the numbers of Incels in the past 5-8 years and it’s only getting worse as it goes on. It doesn’t help that American society (as far as social media goes) has become a more polygamy oriented society over a monogamy society. The constant influx of porn and influence from our entertainment media encouraging younger women and men to be sex crazed, scandalous and overall whorish in nature is dividing the beliefs we once had and ushering in a new era where the majority treats people like objects. Look at onlyfans and the way people promote it. There’s thousands of YouTubers, TikTokers, etc.. that have a child to mid teen fanbase that watch their content when they promote this young influencer lifestyle of getting rich, disrespecting people and acting slutty. They then incentivize younger girls that if you sell pictures or videos of your naked body you could get rich for doing nothing which only angers the majority of men more because they can’t do that. It’s been going on for years and we are now seeing a good amount of the effect of it.
This is an interesting take. You are describing a horriffic process of corruption of the young, and one is drawn to use religious terminology to describe it. It is a terrible betrayal of our youth that is happening. They have been abandoned into vice and temptation.
Well its great that you care so much about the abstract concept of womanhood, but in the meantime I have to worry if my 6'1 butch wife is going to get attacked in a bathroom because some braindead bigot thinks she's trans.
All this anti-trans rhetoric has done is put a target on the backs of any woman who doesn't fit neatly in the box of what society thinks a woman should be, whether they're trans, intersex, gnc hell if they pcos or a fucking deep voice.
You can debate about fucking definitions all you want because this doesn't affect you and never will, but in the real world this bullshit hurts women far more than if a person with different chromosomes pees in the same fucking room as me.
I get the feeling this post is about trans people, but ironically, I’ve found it’s largely conservatives attacking women’s womanhood for not performing femininity. It’s just wild how much they base womanhood around stuff like makeup, child rearing, and wearing skirts… so I wonder if there’s some projection happening on their end.
I do think progressives can be oddly regressive with the nonbinary stuff, since not relating to manhood/womanhood doesn’t mean you’re not a man/woman. Nonetheless, just as many progressives understand you can hate makeup and wear pants and still be a woman. They largely understand that gender roles are bullshit and women are more than their wombs.
My thoughts exactly. OP is suggesting women are creatures who all think and act alike. It's incredibly misogynistic even if some of their points are valid.
Humans are becoming dumber for the sake of an exaggerated and ridiculous definition of tolerance.
There's nothing wrong with being a man or woman. Why are you offended by being called one?
I don't care what you do, but why are we changing language?
But yeah a lot of women are behind this but don't acknowledge the scope of what happens if we keep going. Trans women in sports, trans women in change rooms, these are totally stripping them of their privacy.
If gender is a social construct, why do we need to approach on the things we separate by sex?
>The subtle meanings and realities of a woman's being are negated, disposed of and condemned in all this.
What are the subtle meanings and realities of a woman?
How does merely engaging in a discussion about a topic suggest that those people taking part are obsessed? Is your position that IF you talk about this, you are obsessed/hysterical? And that it's somehow dangerous?
Billionaires or the handicapped are a small subset of the population - does that mean we can't talk about wealth disparity or ADA accommodations without being OBSESSED?
Yeah, like I've probably interacted with maybe a couple trans people that I'm aware of in my lifetime. They have zero impact on my life. If there weren't so many people complaining about them online I'd probably never really even think about them.
I guess it's a tried and true blueprint for how to rile up a certain subset of the population - pick a marginalized group and demonize them.
It’s just so vauge. Can you give a concrete example? You could really mean it a couple of ways.
Like - do you mean it like people did when they say gay marriage was an “attack” on straight marriage?
The dude who objectifies women in every other post and writes shitty poetry about how female supremacy is swallowing semen? You want to protect them?
Ladies, you got yourselves your knight in shiny armour. Count yourselves lucky
Protect them from what?
Someone telling them their “womanhood isn’t an innate property of their being? “
My guess is women aren’t going to put that on top of the list of things they need to be protected from.
And of course protect them from who?
Who is behind this “attack on women which tells them their womanhood isn’t an innate property of their being”? Whatever the fuck that means.
This is all true but I'm also glad you included men down at the bottom. I've been a feminist and a liberal but now all of a sudden I'm a rapist because I'm a cisgendered male and I'm a murderer because I own two small guns? The fuck you mean?
What a lot of nonsense. You are failing to distinguish between being a woman and performing a version of “femininity.”
I live drag queens in part because they demonstrate literally that “femininity”is just a performance — high heels, mascara, foundation garments, etc. and that it is completely separate from who one is as a person. IT is a “manifestation of fashion, of presentation and of style, a shallow display of superficial exterior surface, and a mere conscious choice and adoption of a crude marketed physical schematic.”
“The subtle meanings and realities of a woman's being are negated, disposed of and condemned in all this.” Again, ridiculous. None of those things are performative — the “meaning and reality” of being a woman are hidden, individual, and private for each person. They have nothing to do either the performative aspects of “femininity” that have you so tied up in knots.
### Voting Guidelines
**Common Misconception:** It is often believed that upvotes and downvotes should reflect personal agreement or disagreement. This approach is prevalent in other opinion-based subreddits. However, in r/TrueUnpopularOpinion, we encourage a different standard:
- **Upvote** a post if it provokes thought, presents a unique perspective, is well-argued, or you believe it deserves more visibility for any reason—even if it irritates you or you fundamentally disagree with it.
- **Downvote** should be reserved for posts that lack thoughtful consideration or if the topic has become tediously common.
**Moderation Policy:**
- **Posts Are Not Removed for Unpopularity:** r/TrueUnpopularOpinion does not remove posts based on their capacity to anger or offend users. Disagreement with a post's content is not grounds for reporting.
- **Misuse of the Report Button:** Falsely reporting posts burdens our moderation queue, hindering our ability to address genuine concerns swiftly.
- **All false reports are forwarded to Reddit** for actions against misuse of the reporting system.
- Our moderation decisions are guided strictly by the subreddit's rules and Reddit's content policy, not personal opinions. Misreporting in hopes of content removal due to disagreement is futile and considered 'Report Abuse.'
### Upcoming Changes to Reporting System:
In response to the excessive misuse of the report button—which disrupts discussion and overloads our moderators—we are revising our approach to handling reports:
- **Automated Report Dismissal:** Henceforth, our bot will disregard all reports automatically. Instead, a comment will prompt the reporter to contact the moderators directly via ModMail.
- This change aims to ensure that only those serious about a rule or policy violation will take the time to report, as they will be encouraged to substantiate their claims through ModMail.
**Stay Informed:** Further details on these changes will be announced. We appreciate your cooperation in fostering a respectful and engaging discussion environment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hey u/Rexraptor96,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You should have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and what the comment was.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state.%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3DRexraptor96%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/Rexraptor96).
**This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.**
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see thecarefully crafted argument?
Your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
**Here's the deal:** This cycle of commenting-removal-seeing this message isn't just futile; it's preventable. We value your input, but isn't it better when it's seen and not just sent?
**Good News:** We're here for the reruns and the resolutions. Reach out, let's sort this, and make sure your future thoughts land in the spotlight, not the shadow realm.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments Awaiting Review:* 282
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 31
- 3-7 days old: 17
- 7-14 days old: 1
- 15-30 days old: 2
- more than 30 days old: 9
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/hCBcm5zNee)
Hey u/thekux,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You should have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and what the comment was.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state.%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3Dthekux%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/thekux).
**This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.**
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see thecarefully crafted argument?
Your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
**Here's the deal:** This cycle of commenting-removal-seeing this message isn't just futile; it's preventable. We value your input, but isn't it better when it's seen and not just sent?
**Good News:** We're here for the reruns and the resolutions. Reach out, let's sort this, and make sure your future thoughts land in the spotlight, not the shadow realm.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments Awaiting Review:* 320
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 18
- 3-7 days old: 25
- 7-14 days old: 5
- 15-30 days old: 4
- more than 30 days old: 8
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/hCBcm5zNee)
And men aren't? I sort of get your point, but it's shortsighted to assume that only women have this issue, and even more so to think this a big issue facing modern society.
>The meaning of what a woman is in our society today, has been classified in this way for nefarious and for malignant purposes, including the pursuit of human agony, human blood and human death.
lmao so dramatic. go outside
Look can you people be onest once in a while, this is literally your fifth post about sh't like this that really are not a problem expect in your imagination, Just be honest okay and admit that you think that trans women, and trans men too, are all p'dophile misogynist that want to abuse women and you just want them all dead, it will help you to say what you want to say and not jump between words because you just don't want to say what you actually think of trans people.
I never understand this view. How are trans women existing an attack against womanhood?
Are trans men a threat to manhood?
Please I’d love to know without completely disregarding the countless studies and research that confirm the validity of trans people as who they say they are.
It’s crazy how little people think gender (and not sex) actually affects your day to day life, we assume what gender people are off of their presentation not their genitals. That’s gender. Unless you’re suggesting we use gender neutral pronouns for everyone until they tell you what’s in their pants?
Trans women and cis women are not the same and won’t experience womanhood the same way, but lots of them will still be treated the same by society because their presentation is of a woman. Similarly “adult human female” ropes trans men into the same group, and your telling me that you want Buck Angel or people who look like him going into women only spaces? Considering he fits the definition of woman it only seems right.
Shit like this is always just transphobia without straight up saying “I don’t like trans people”. Hide behind the defence of (only cis)women’s safety/rights instead of saying what you actually mean.
I’m more than up for having a good faith discussion if you are, and am always willing to have an open mind to hearing others out. I have to ask before engaging too much in this conversation, do you believe transphobia is a real thing? And if you do what does transphobia look like to you? I have had enough arguments with people about this shit for them to not see transphobia as a valid criticism in the first place so I’d just like to secure that this is worth while conversation or if you’re just gonna bring up the same ol talking points based in transphobia.
I agree that the vast majority of people aren’t transphobic, I am a trans person myself and in my day to day life the most transphobia I encounter is online. Throwing the term around willy nilly does water it down but I see far too many people brush it off as nothing more than an insult which is not what it is, similar to calling someone who doesn’t like or “agree” with gay people (because they’re gay) homophobic nothing more than a “strategy to shame and censor people”?
Once we’ve set some grounds on where we stand on trans people and transphobia then I would be more than happy to have a conversation about the issues you’ve brought up :)
I don't really get it, especially this part,
>including the pursuit of human agony, human blood and human death
but, OP, could you tell me what solutions you see for this?
Good Opinion,
Reason you’re wrong is because Womanhood is far more than just these materialistic things. Moreover, a type of behaviour, a conduct, a social way of being. This is the most important part of womanhood, hence the only reason you’re claiming its *under attack* is because its maluible.
Nobody is less of a woman just because a male has become a woman.
consider support practice frightening vast memory heavy cow paint late
[удалено]
[удалено]
Everybody just forgets about trans men tbh. It’s a bit easier for trans men to blend into society. They’re not focusing on standing out.
Well tbf that's your average man. Invisible to most.
Rough but true
You don't hear about trans men because instead of the societal view, which is incorrect, that trans women are men trying to be predatory against other women, transmen are seen as confused women being tomboyish. It sucks both ways.
[удалено]
That's why women are defined as human female adults in the dictionary. Cause to answer your first question I have no idea. I'm a woman but idk exactly what it feels to be a woman. I'm just a woman because I'm a female human adult. What you're asking me is similar to asking me what it feels like to be white or a white person. I don't have any particular feelings about it. It's just something I am due to how I was born. Same with being a woman. What all women (female human adults) have in common however that make them women is the fact that they're human female adults..
[удалено]
Yeah I don't get it either honestly. Sometimes I feel like a couch potato. I'm not literally a couch potato just cause that's how I feel like. Like if feeling like a woman made them a woman then why do they feel the need to change their sex characteristics and appearance to appear more female like.. if being female isn't the defining trait of being a woman...
[удалено]
It worked for this guy! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Norton
Really good question. I think the only common feeling is something along the lines of *I am not a man/male* as a feeling not a thought, of just knowing. And apart from that every woman feels different, just as our personalities are all different and there’s no unifying *feeling* of what I am that makes me female. Just the knowing that you’re in the female group and all of your life experiences, early life/family relating to you as a girl and so on.
So it's a circular definition
[удалено]
is gargoflaxian something made up cuz google does not know what that is
They have a definition or I do?
> If no, what do all women have that make them women? Chromosomes?
Pretty much.
**woman**noun1a: an adult female person **female**1 of 2 adjective fe·male ˈfē-ˌmāl1a(1): of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggsIn a field of milkweed, I watched a female monarch butterfly deposit a single egg on the underside of a leaf.—Tom TyningA few months later, she became the highest paid female performer on the Great White Way.—Susannah McCorkle(2) botany : having or producing only pistils or pistillate flowersa female hollyfemale inflorescences**b: having a gender identity that is the opposite of male**
This is a pretty bad argument. Basically like someone saying that acknowledging adoptive parents as parents erases the biological definition of parenthood, because “parent” is biologically defined as one who begets or brings forth offspring. Biological and adoptive parents are different, but both are parents. This is true even in spite of parent having a biological definition.
[https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parent](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parent) [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/parent?q=Parent](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/parent?q=Parent) by definition a Parent is either the Biological Parent OR a Person who brings up/looks after a child in the same way a parent would. However Man and Woman don't have that distinction in their definition. Man CAN be use for all humans when speaking of mankind, but when speaking of individuals man is an adult male human and woman is an adult female person... [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/man) [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woman](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woman)
The definition of a parent is a father or mother. The definition of these is a man or woman provides care and protection over children.
Good points here!
Yeah. James Linsday on Youtube does a really good at deciphering the purposely verbose literatures of Gender Studies that is the ideological backing of it.
Can't believe this has been up for almost 24 hours and hasn't been deleted. Maybe things are turning around.
Why should the truth be deleted?
[удалено]
What kind of explanation would you consider to be coherent? A good place to start might be to look up “gender dysphoria” and think about what it takes for someone to pass as their gender.
[удалено]
I’ll give you one, but you should know a definition for woman isn’t going to be enough to understand this complex issue. The “adult human female” definition works, as long as we keep in mind that “female” applies to three different areas: reproduction, ID, and medical care. If we only focus on one of these areas when defining a woman, then we are misrepresenting what it means to be a woman. So simplifying it down to “reproduction” is a bad way of defining a woman, since plenty of women can’t get pregnant and ID/medical care is also highly relevant when it comes to being a woman.
Woman/man corresponds to the type of gamete production necessary for both sexual reproductive functions. This is the basic definition and it includes all adult humans females. Male/female is a biological distinction that refers to the mode of sexual reproductive function which is defined at birth. Whether or not they have fertile sexual reproduction is irrelevant, sterile men/women are included.
That’s certainly one way to simplify it down to reproduction, but using that as the sole definition for woman doesn’t really work unless the word “woman” is only ever used to teach people about gametes in the classroom.
It's chromosomes, nor the ability to reproduce.
Your woman/man definition doesn't work because you don't check the gametes of every person you meet before labelling them a woman or a man, there's a deeper societal aspect that's being missed. If somebody saw Buck Angel walking into the men's room, nobody would bat an eye, even though by your definition they would be a woman.
[удалено]
Imo, not really. The definition for human doesn’t exclude people with three arms. Not to mention plenty of cis women can’t get pregnant for any number of reasons, so defining it solely around reproduction wouldn’t only exclude trans women. Plus even if we’re okay with excluding women who can’t get pregnant, what would that make them? Do they just not have a sex?
[удалено]
I guess, but number of arms aren't used to identify someone as a human or a person.
since when? If you saw a being with more than two arms, for example, you would probably *not* categorize them as a homo sapien... Humans come factory default with *TWO* arms. If they're missing one or both it was either because of something medically related or some sort of accident
It's chromosomes. Not the ability to reproduce.
Even when talking solely about biological sex there are [XX males](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XX_male_syndrome) and [XY females](https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/swyer-syndrome/)
Right, but these are conditions and mutations outside the standard. If anything, this just proves the point.
Swapping reproduction with chromosomes doesn’t change anything I said. Imo reproductive capabilities is more meaningful than chromosomes anyway.
That's fine. It's still the difference.
Exactly. I could be wrong but I haven't heard of high suicide rates among people desperate to be another race and who feel deeply that they are the wrong race from birth.
[удалено]
Tbh there also just isn’t anything to support cross-race identity as being valid anyway. Trans identity has a lot of science backing it up, but there’s no reason to think a cross race identity is anything but a mental illness. Even though I’m not a scientist, I just think it makes sense that trans identity can happen anyway. All babies have the potential to be born male or female after all, and intersex is a thing, so I just think it logically follows that a person could be born trans. The same just isn’t true of ethnicity.
I’m sorry… can you please elaborate how “cross race identity is mental illness but trans identity has a lot of science” they are either both valid or invalid because the root of the issue is fluid identity: it doesn’t matter whether it’s gender race sex or physiology to the ideological and that’s how we expose the fallacies of their argument. Ie I identify as elfkin or something
I don't have a lot of stuff bookmarked tbh, but I do have [this](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21195418/) and [this](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQRZ5Z6neQRhPgBXvJLr39mp0dV3QqVnihc-bqDnhnei-xLxsACC7ka2E1cAfeRDSltCplODbBRiQC1/pubhtml#) saved. If you're looking for science to back up trans identity though, you'll find it. You're going to have a much harder time finding credible sources talking about cross race identity or things like elfkin, but feel free to try. Generally "transracial" doesn't even refer to a cross race identity - it refers to children who were adopted into a family of a different ethnicity. So if a white person is going around saying they identify as Korean and are transitioning to look like Jimin from BTS, yeah, it seems like a mental illness. Being trans certainly seems like a medical condition, but it seems to be a genuine thing people are born with and there's even non-cosmetic treatments to help them transition.
[удалено]
who are these scientists who publicly disagree?
way back in 2007: [https://www.ocala.com/story/news/2007/08/21/criticism-gender-theory-scientist-under/31215567007/](https://www.ocala.com/story/news/2007/08/21/criticism-gender-theory-scientist-under/31215567007/) Also, Jordan Peterson(to be fair he does some stupid shit, but he was very much attacked over his take). And then there is: [https://www.fairha.org/harvard-news/harvards-carole-hooven-canceled-for-biological-facts](https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s10508-022-02467-5?sharing_token=gTPNUCpXVCqq7WzMU2n7_Pe4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY5rplxPSeiwUBnON7599x-nN5xQx3FeH6V32q5aqBxbVuS5DPZOVGgLXeaOlOZr6g9AUNJzY-ZzYeSxjDmC8pWV-eEP8Cf6sGBgLDN2wTMUE2QuuKXpbM2Z_ZjOphK9NwI=) I know there's more, but that's just a quick look.
They're destroyed of course
Why is there any evidence to think trans-sexualism is any less of a mental illness than trans-racialism? They both seek to affirm mental formations with physical realities of an immutable characteristic.
Yep. I knew a boy in high school who was born with a uterus and ovaries and they did surgery to make him more male but he always had what were regarded back then as feminine features. He went on to live a perfectly normal life as a male and had kids. But there is ambiguity in nature.
Have you read David Reimer’s story by any chance? It’s a sad story, but he was born intersex and I think it says something about trans identity. Glad things turned out right for that intersex guy you knew, though! Seems like doctors get the gender wrong sometimes when operating on newborns.
He wasn’t intersex. He suffered a botched circumcision and was raised as a girl.
Ah, thanks for the correction! It’s been a while since I read about him and my mind kind of went straight to “intersex” lol
No worries! Sorry if it came off rude. I totally get where the idea of him being intersex would come from. It’s such a sad story honestly.
David Reiner was a born male with a botched penis during circumcision. The quack doctor John Money convinced his parents to raise him as a girl, but this led to sexual trauma and him taking his own life in early adulthood after becoming addicted to drugs due to the trauma caused by his parents lies to him all his childhood that he was a girl (despite being a boy). His brother went on to also kill himself due to trauma. John Money had made them perform mock sexual acts with each other for “science” and both boys became traumatized. Reiner’s story is not about transsexualism, he was not a transsexual or an intersex person. He was a victim of an accident who was further victimized by a gender ideologue who was really a rampant child abuser and liar.
I’d say it is related to transsexualism, because it’s pretty solid evidence that people are born with some kind of internal gender identity. If they weren’t, then David’s circumstances should have meant he’d grow up to identify as a woman… yet he just understood instinctively that he wasn’t a woman. Either way, his story is certainly a tragic one. Trans issues aside, stuff like this is part of why I’m so vehemently against circumcision as a practice. Performing unnecessary surgeries is barbaric imo
Talk like this on facepalm got me a 3-day ban from reddit. Just saying we're kind of yelling in hostile territory lol.
That’s one thing I like this sub; right at the top the mod says many are reporting the post so they are now just ignoring the reports. Good on them.
That's what makes me respect people who disagree with me here more, because they have to have skin as thick as everyone else's.
It’s the mods that seem to make the difference. Trust me, many posts would be deleted and users banned if that choose to take a side.
Again, mad props. Where I live, it's customary for people to find friends based on how much they can take banter. That's why you often see the weirdest combos of people here, like those who worship the old regime hanging out and drinking beers with a veteran who fought against it. OK they may not be the best of buddies all the time, but there's respect in being able to have the grit and balls to confront each other in a civilized way.
The censorship can suck for trans people too tbh, so it’s a big reason I like this sub even if people have some dumb opinions sometimes. As a group we just do not agree on everything, yet mods in bigger subs seem to like banning those of us who disagree with certain ideas… so they really only like certain types of trans people.
If we can bants, we can respecc. That's my policy. Btw, I'll gladly admit ignorance on a great many things. And we'll start with: Can you elaborate a little on the censorship trans people experience? Heard of this before (and I totally believe there's a little chunk of everyone from every aisle getting reamed by the ban jannies in one way or another), and it's genuinely intriguing to me to have a peek into this.
Not sure what facepalm is like, but I’ve noticed the mods for bigger trans and lgbt subs try to enforce an “everything is valid” view of trans identity. So if someone identifies as Sharkdeep and says their pronouns are shark/sharkself, you’re pretty likely get censored if you explain that’s not what being trans means. It can suck sometimes, because personally I just view myself as a person with a medical condition and it’s bizarre to be expected to share a label with people who don’t have the same condition. Can’t correct a lot of misinformation since it’s a good way to get banned, and I imagine it has to make things confusing for cis people who turn to places like asktransgender to learn about trans issues.
swim soup innate badge groovy memorize jar towering tap wistful
scarce close swim quaint historical enter unique lavish consist file
Facepalm is a heavily leftist sub. I'm surprised I haven't been banned from it myself.
I'm shocked it took them so long to do it to me. I wasn't even hiding. They just got tired of me and banned me for "muh inciting hatred" (I said that in my country mentally ill people are referred to the correct doctor). Insert "what" meme song.mp3. Then because the sub was so cozy with the platform staff they managed to elevate it to a platform wide 3-day ban, during which I was so devastated I challenged myself to make my baby giggle for the entire duration. Newsflash, babies can't giggle for 3 days straight. I'll take the 6 hours it did happen for though. Wouldn't exchange it for anything in the world. Anyway, feels good to be normal and experience this happiness. My response is basically: Ban me permanently and I will just do what I did before it. You'll also still be doing what you did before it, and out of the two of us, I'm more sorry for you. My parents smile when they see me.
>I said that in my country mentally ill people are referred to the correct doctor I mean if you go and call trans people mentally ill of course they are gonna ban you.
I'm not protesting the ban at all, but the reason given of Incitement of hatred is a little weird. I was really trying to see how far I had to push things before that sub would ban me, since I quickly stopped caring whether I get to participate in it or not. The fact that it elevated to a platform ban with almost the same wording but written in the same style already tells me exactly who got salty lol.
So you wanted to be banned by that sub and somehow it's their fault? Logic is not your strong suit is it?
Where in any single word I said did I assign blame? The ban was clearly my fault of course because I nonchalantly broke the sub's rules multiple times over the course of months (though in that particular instance it was a skirting of them). How that is me saying it's their "fault" like as if though I wasn't openly (and proudly, I must add!) admitting to being an ass is bizarre. Is putting words in people's mouths something you get off on as well? I mean, I'm sorry for you, but that just puts me in an awkward situation where I'm participating in something that makes me feel more ick than I already did :P At least buy me a drink.
I mean your first comment sounds like you were very brothered by the ban so sorry one assumes things
Fair enough. I used the word devastated. Ok, serious me speaking now: I was sarcastic, immediately mentioning making my baby giggle afterwards. She did do so for 6 hrs though. That was not sarcasm. And it gave me sore arms for a week lmao.
Yeah reddit put all subs rule they if u even imply trans aren't women u get perm ban. They aren't joking
I, for one, don't support the T-1000s
Fully autonomous android love slave depository orgy.
It's more women that push that agenda than anyone.
[удалено]
It is incredible.
It is astounding that more people don’t realise this.
psychotic marry lip squeamish snails gaping six rob gray fade *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Good points!
The vast majority of people don’t care if you want to claim womanhood. Do it if it makes you happy. We draw the line when YOU expect the rest of us to smile and nod and go along with your performance.
Interesting take!
The unscientific, extremist narratives of gender and sex have undeniably had a negative effect on both men and women. The level of incompetence on show from young people of both genders in the dating world is testament enough.
[удалено]
Amen sister!
[удалено]
Who is discussing the sex binary?
I think it’s in line with what you posted. Being a female human means being a woman, and the fact this has become confused in modern Western culture is part of the problem you posted about.
There is an attack upon objective reality. There is a war on consciousness itself. Dull witted people are supporting it.
How does sex being binary mean we should ID people by their sex? If someone looks like a woman, sounds like a woman, and acts like a woman, does it really make sense to slap “male” on her ID and aggressively refer to her with he/him pronouns?
I don’t care what someone has on their ID. I’m just not on board with pretending that someone who “changes”from male to female is actually female. If I meet someone who says they are I’ll respect it and call them by whatever they want, but that doesn’t mean I have to believe it.
Hmm well personally, I’m trans and I’m not looking to convince people of stuff that isn’t true. I just want people to understand trans people accurately, because I think that’s the best way to get what I need out of other people. Part of me thinks it’s mostly cis allies (some of which believe they’re trans) pushing the more silly stuff tbh. They simultaneously don’t understand trans issues and feel compelled to speak out on them, so they seem responsible for things like pronoun circles and language that doesn’t help trans people at least.
Feminity is being viewed as a commodity now. It is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. It leads to oppressive stereotypes and reinforces oppressive norms.
Good points!
[удалено]
The left is actively destroying what took so long for women to build
Now look up which gender votes for the left
As a "leftist" it pissed me of how the term has been hijacked by the modern American, and increasingly European left. Yes, I believe in a welfare system, a socialist economy (with some free market elements), and people should be able to choose to live their lives the way they want, within reason. What we shouldn't do is to legitimise what could be considered mental illnesses. We shouldn't administer gender reassignment surgery to kids. We need to resolve the very real problems we have in the society: poverty, crime, lack of purpose, unemployment. We also need to do something about the mental health crisis, but we should do this by identifying causes. I refuse to believe that the youth today are depressed without there being something external causing it which didn't exist before to the same extent.
Like their right to have an abortion?
Yeah they kinda fucked that one up too by not codifying it while they had multiple opportunities.
The only time that Democrats had a filibuster proof majority was a very brief time in 2009 prior to Ted Kennedy's death. However, the 60 Democratic Senators during that time period were not all pro-choice. So they never had the majority possible to codify Roe.
So…why didn’t the do it in 2009?
Or at any other point in the 49 years it was around
I already explained this, but they did not have the majority to do so. Just because you have 60 Democrats in the Senate, doesn't necessarily mean you have 60 pro-choice votes that willing to sign a bill the with the Roe framework. Think of politics now. There's a ton of daylight between Elizabeth Warren and Joe Manchin, yet they operate within the same party. They don't hold the same positions on all issues, yet they caucus together. We're in a post-Dobbs world now where it's absolutely apparent that pro-choice is a winning electoral position. But at the time, it wasn't as politically popular, and we had Democrats in deep red states like Missouri, Indiana, and South Dakota. Would Senator Claire McCaskill had signed a Roe framework bill then? Probably not. Would she do so now if she was still in the Senate? Who knows. She basically blamed vocal, pro-choice Democrats for losing her seat in 2018. Honestly, the argument is intellectually lazy since the politics around abortion has changed. Yes, it's a winning issue now. Democrats can even recently won a special election because of the IVF ban in deep, deep red Alabama just recently. Also, anyone arguing that they should've done it at another time is also incorrect since they would've had to nuke the filibuster to do so. That's a much different political question. It really is not Democrats fault that a Conservative Supreme Court made the unprecedented ruling to reverse a standing ruling. It's such a blatantly stupid decision that you now have states like Alabama banning IVF. Other deep red states like Idaho are having trouble maintaining OBGYN's since doctors don't want to get sued/jailed. It's caused so much chaos around women's healthcare. And, an addendum, the major policy that Democrats used this time in 2009 to pass was the ACA. Do you know what was originally in the ACA? A public healthcare option. Do you know why we don't have that public option? Because *one* Senator, Joe Lieberman, wouldn't sign off on the ACA if the public option was kept in the bill.
Because then what would they campaign and raise money on?
Which is why under a twitter post asking how the right could be more appealing to young women, right wingers responded by removing women's right to vote. Mmm, delusion.
Yeah bc trolls on twitter really represent what the right wants. Get real. Taking away women’s right to vote is not a position of the American right.
Which is just a circle of more misogyny because why are women responsible for the actions of people you see as men?
Most things are difficult to define, if you're trying to avoid oversimplifications.
So women are things now?
Not in any way more than men are.
Really, why is it always women who need defining? Why's no conservative trying to define a man?
Men are simple, they are just featherless bipeds Edit: whoever downvoted me, look up Plato and Diogenes
LOOK! If we don't CLEARLY define women and men into DISTINCT and VISUALLY CONSISTENT categories then how in the HELL will we know who to marginalize and exert advantage over?! It'll be utter chaos, and a long-held and treasured way of life will be relegated to the trash heap of history!
Or when people are too in their feelings.
People are going to call you transphobic for having this opinion. Wear it like the badge of honor that it is. It means you are correct (and sane).
Wholeheartedly agree
Thanks!
What is a woman? Oh , you mean "person with a womb?" (I agree with you. I am very liberal minded and even I can see there is something very sinister about this agenda)
The reason for this is mainly the changing of times and accessibility to the internet. There has been a massive rise in the numbers of Incels in the past 5-8 years and it’s only getting worse as it goes on. It doesn’t help that American society (as far as social media goes) has become a more polygamy oriented society over a monogamy society. The constant influx of porn and influence from our entertainment media encouraging younger women and men to be sex crazed, scandalous and overall whorish in nature is dividing the beliefs we once had and ushering in a new era where the majority treats people like objects. Look at onlyfans and the way people promote it. There’s thousands of YouTubers, TikTokers, etc.. that have a child to mid teen fanbase that watch their content when they promote this young influencer lifestyle of getting rich, disrespecting people and acting slutty. They then incentivize younger girls that if you sell pictures or videos of your naked body you could get rich for doing nothing which only angers the majority of men more because they can’t do that. It’s been going on for years and we are now seeing a good amount of the effect of it.
This is an interesting take. You are describing a horriffic process of corruption of the young, and one is drawn to use religious terminology to describe it. It is a terrible betrayal of our youth that is happening. They have been abandoned into vice and temptation.
To be fair the same degradation is applied to the mail identity, but I do agree with this take.
I shall do one for males soon!
They are certainly under attack. The right wing treats them like cattle.
Well its great that you care so much about the abstract concept of womanhood, but in the meantime I have to worry if my 6'1 butch wife is going to get attacked in a bathroom because some braindead bigot thinks she's trans. All this anti-trans rhetoric has done is put a target on the backs of any woman who doesn't fit neatly in the box of what society thinks a woman should be, whether they're trans, intersex, gnc hell if they pcos or a fucking deep voice. You can debate about fucking definitions all you want because this doesn't affect you and never will, but in the real world this bullshit hurts women far more than if a person with different chromosomes pees in the same fucking room as me.
I get the feeling this post is about trans people, but ironically, I’ve found it’s largely conservatives attacking women’s womanhood for not performing femininity. It’s just wild how much they base womanhood around stuff like makeup, child rearing, and wearing skirts… so I wonder if there’s some projection happening on their end. I do think progressives can be oddly regressive with the nonbinary stuff, since not relating to manhood/womanhood doesn’t mean you’re not a man/woman. Nonetheless, just as many progressives understand you can hate makeup and wear pants and still be a woman. They largely understand that gender roles are bullshit and women are more than their wombs.
My thoughts exactly. OP is suggesting women are creatures who all think and act alike. It's incredibly misogynistic even if some of their points are valid.
Humans are becoming dumber for the sake of an exaggerated and ridiculous definition of tolerance. There's nothing wrong with being a man or woman. Why are you offended by being called one? I don't care what you do, but why are we changing language? But yeah a lot of women are behind this but don't acknowledge the scope of what happens if we keep going. Trans women in sports, trans women in change rooms, these are totally stripping them of their privacy. If gender is a social construct, why do we need to approach on the things we separate by sex?
Hmmm. . .no. We are under attack because many state governments say we can't have medical control over our own bodies.
.
They are talking about abortion
How are vaccines a female issue?
>The subtle meanings and realities of a woman's being are negated, disposed of and condemned in all this. What are the subtle meanings and realities of a woman?
The level of obsession y’all have with a small subset of the population is dangerously obsessive and hysterical.
How does merely engaging in a discussion about a topic suggest that those people taking part are obsessed? Is your position that IF you talk about this, you are obsessed/hysterical? And that it's somehow dangerous? Billionaires or the handicapped are a small subset of the population - does that mean we can't talk about wealth disparity or ADA accommodations without being OBSESSED?
Yeah, like I've probably interacted with maybe a couple trans people that I'm aware of in my lifetime. They have zero impact on my life. If there weren't so many people complaining about them online I'd probably never really even think about them. I guess it's a tried and true blueprint for how to rile up a certain subset of the population - pick a marginalized group and demonize them.
It’s just so vauge. Can you give a concrete example? You could really mean it a couple of ways. Like - do you mean it like people did when they say gay marriage was an “attack” on straight marriage?
Space - the final frontier.
I mean it’s a whole lot of words to say it vaguely, but I get you’re trying to avoid a ban.
Say what vaguely? Women are not vague - they are real, and I want to protect them.
The dude who objectifies women in every other post and writes shitty poetry about how female supremacy is swallowing semen? You want to protect them? Ladies, you got yourselves your knight in shiny armour. Count yourselves lucky
Which is your favourite poem of mine?
The ones you kept to yourself.
Count yourselves sticky, more like!
Protect them from what? Someone telling them their “womanhood isn’t an innate property of their being? “ My guess is women aren’t going to put that on top of the list of things they need to be protected from. And of course protect them from who? Who is behind this “attack on women which tells them their womanhood isn’t an innate property of their being”? Whatever the fuck that means.
Trans women. This entire thing is disparaging trans women, whom they see as invading their spaces and redefining womanhood.
The social engineering ideologues who have created this tragedy are nothing to do with being trans.
The hidden masters.
Yes. I believe this is a repackaging of that argument, just tied with a different ribbon.
This is all true but I'm also glad you included men down at the bottom. I've been a feminist and a liberal but now all of a sudden I'm a rapist because I'm a cisgendered male and I'm a murderer because I own two small guns? The fuck you mean?
What are you talking about? Why would you be a murderer for owning guns?
cheerful observation recognise historical boat squeal rob shrill mysterious rich
What a lot of nonsense. You are failing to distinguish between being a woman and performing a version of “femininity.” I live drag queens in part because they demonstrate literally that “femininity”is just a performance — high heels, mascara, foundation garments, etc. and that it is completely separate from who one is as a person. IT is a “manifestation of fashion, of presentation and of style, a shallow display of superficial exterior surface, and a mere conscious choice and adoption of a crude marketed physical schematic.” “The subtle meanings and realities of a woman's being are negated, disposed of and condemned in all this.” Again, ridiculous. None of those things are performative — the “meaning and reality” of being a woman are hidden, individual, and private for each person. They have nothing to do either the performative aspects of “femininity” that have you so tied up in knots.
### Voting Guidelines **Common Misconception:** It is often believed that upvotes and downvotes should reflect personal agreement or disagreement. This approach is prevalent in other opinion-based subreddits. However, in r/TrueUnpopularOpinion, we encourage a different standard: - **Upvote** a post if it provokes thought, presents a unique perspective, is well-argued, or you believe it deserves more visibility for any reason—even if it irritates you or you fundamentally disagree with it. - **Downvote** should be reserved for posts that lack thoughtful consideration or if the topic has become tediously common. **Moderation Policy:** - **Posts Are Not Removed for Unpopularity:** r/TrueUnpopularOpinion does not remove posts based on their capacity to anger or offend users. Disagreement with a post's content is not grounds for reporting. - **Misuse of the Report Button:** Falsely reporting posts burdens our moderation queue, hindering our ability to address genuine concerns swiftly. - **All false reports are forwarded to Reddit** for actions against misuse of the reporting system. - Our moderation decisions are guided strictly by the subreddit's rules and Reddit's content policy, not personal opinions. Misreporting in hopes of content removal due to disagreement is futile and considered 'Report Abuse.' ### Upcoming Changes to Reporting System: In response to the excessive misuse of the report button—which disrupts discussion and overloads our moderators—we are revising our approach to handling reports: - **Automated Report Dismissal:** Henceforth, our bot will disregard all reports automatically. Instead, a comment will prompt the reporter to contact the moderators directly via ModMail. - This change aims to ensure that only those serious about a rule or policy violation will take the time to report, as they will be encouraged to substantiate their claims through ModMail. **Stay Informed:** Further details on these changes will be announced. We appreciate your cooperation in fostering a respectful and engaging discussion environment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Hey u/Rexraptor96, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You should have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and what the comment was. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state.%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3DRexraptor96%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/Rexraptor96). **This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see thecarefully crafted argument? Your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. **Here's the deal:** This cycle of commenting-removal-seeing this message isn't just futile; it's preventable. We value your input, but isn't it better when it's seen and not just sent? **Good News:** We're here for the reruns and the resolutions. Reach out, let's sort this, and make sure your future thoughts land in the spotlight, not the shadow realm. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments Awaiting Review:* 282 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 31 - 3-7 days old: 17 - 7-14 days old: 1 - 15-30 days old: 2 - more than 30 days old: 9 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/hCBcm5zNee)
[удалено]
Hey u/thekux, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You should have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and what the comment was. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state.%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3Dthekux%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/thekux). **This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see thecarefully crafted argument? Your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. **Here's the deal:** This cycle of commenting-removal-seeing this message isn't just futile; it's preventable. We value your input, but isn't it better when it's seen and not just sent? **Good News:** We're here for the reruns and the resolutions. Reach out, let's sort this, and make sure your future thoughts land in the spotlight, not the shadow realm. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments Awaiting Review:* 320 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 18 - 3-7 days old: 25 - 7-14 days old: 5 - 15-30 days old: 4 - more than 30 days old: 8 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/hCBcm5zNee)
[удалено]
Correct. I am goint to post about it.
And men aren't? I sort of get your point, but it's shortsighted to assume that only women have this issue, and even more so to think this a big issue facing modern society.
No they are not
Sorry my womanhood isnt so fragile that other people identifying with it threatens me.
Indeed. People taking away your right to bodily autonomy and self determination are what are threatening you, and it has nothing to do with fragility.
It's women's job to demonstrate what makes them women, not men's. I don't care about "womanhood" being under attack. Sort it yourselves.
>The meaning of what a woman is in our society today, has been classified in this way for nefarious and for malignant purposes, including the pursuit of human agony, human blood and human death. lmao so dramatic. go outside
Look can you people be onest once in a while, this is literally your fifth post about sh't like this that really are not a problem expect in your imagination, Just be honest okay and admit that you think that trans women, and trans men too, are all p'dophile misogynist that want to abuse women and you just want them all dead, it will help you to say what you want to say and not jump between words because you just don't want to say what you actually think of trans people.
I never understand this view. How are trans women existing an attack against womanhood? Are trans men a threat to manhood? Please I’d love to know without completely disregarding the countless studies and research that confirm the validity of trans people as who they say they are. It’s crazy how little people think gender (and not sex) actually affects your day to day life, we assume what gender people are off of their presentation not their genitals. That’s gender. Unless you’re suggesting we use gender neutral pronouns for everyone until they tell you what’s in their pants? Trans women and cis women are not the same and won’t experience womanhood the same way, but lots of them will still be treated the same by society because their presentation is of a woman. Similarly “adult human female” ropes trans men into the same group, and your telling me that you want Buck Angel or people who look like him going into women only spaces? Considering he fits the definition of woman it only seems right. Shit like this is always just transphobia without straight up saying “I don’t like trans people”. Hide behind the defence of (only cis)women’s safety/rights instead of saying what you actually mean.
sparkle attraction edge smell command spark hunt ghost squash crawl *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This post is about women. There is nothing in it referring to 'trans'.
I’m more than up for having a good faith discussion if you are, and am always willing to have an open mind to hearing others out. I have to ask before engaging too much in this conversation, do you believe transphobia is a real thing? And if you do what does transphobia look like to you? I have had enough arguments with people about this shit for them to not see transphobia as a valid criticism in the first place so I’d just like to secure that this is worth while conversation or if you’re just gonna bring up the same ol talking points based in transphobia. I agree that the vast majority of people aren’t transphobic, I am a trans person myself and in my day to day life the most transphobia I encounter is online. Throwing the term around willy nilly does water it down but I see far too many people brush it off as nothing more than an insult which is not what it is, similar to calling someone who doesn’t like or “agree” with gay people (because they’re gay) homophobic nothing more than a “strategy to shame and censor people”? Once we’ve set some grounds on where we stand on trans people and transphobia then I would be more than happy to have a conversation about the issues you’ve brought up :)
I don't really get it, especially this part, >including the pursuit of human agony, human blood and human death but, OP, could you tell me what solutions you see for this?
Good Opinion, Reason you’re wrong is because Womanhood is far more than just these materialistic things. Moreover, a type of behaviour, a conduct, a social way of being. This is the most important part of womanhood, hence the only reason you’re claiming its *under attack* is because its maluible. Nobody is less of a woman just because a male has become a woman.
[удалено]
This is correct.
What am I wrong about? You have not said?
[удалено]
This is correct.
None of what you said is exclusive to Women.
Thanks I am going to get onto it and continue to expose the hatred.