Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

If transgender why not transrace? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by =incognito=)
    No.
    happy to hear
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by =incognito=)
    Interesting - how do you identify? I think it's fair to say trans people could always use more allies - if you'd like to learn more I can dig out some resources for you. Let me know and I'll drop you a PM.



    Not sure if wilfully blind, given that I posted a link listing these above, or generally an idiot. Since I have neither the time nor the crayons to explain this to you, I'm not going to engage in further non-constructive discussion.
    Since you have 'lost internet connection' or been distracted by another thread rather than refuting my argument I must come to the conclusion that I am right and that women are no more oppressed than men in our society.

    Have a good night
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teslamegafan)
    I'm talking about an actual list of how women are oppressed. For example it could include laws that women are not allowed to drive, they are not allowed to vote, they are not allowed to enter certain careers, they are not paid the same as men (contravention of the 1963 Equal Pay Act).
    In the link you posted I can see no laws but rather feelings and subjective opinions about trivial issues. When we are debating whether a major societal problem exists we should be talking about laws not feelings, like "I feel scared if a man looks at me in the supermarket." The writer cannot speak for all women and neither can you. Are there any LAWS oppressing women in the west?
    Let me just make a quick point. Subjective opinions and feelings can have an impact on outcomes. For example, a bus company may be more critical of faults caused by female prospective drivers. Likewise, a hair salon may be more critical of male hairdressers. Public opinion does not prevent you from achieving a particular goal, but it can make it more difficult. This bias can go either way, but women do seem to get the worse end of the stick, at least traditionally.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bjornhattan)
    Let me just make a quick point. Subjective opinions and feelings can have an impact on outcomes. For example, a bus company may be more critical of faults caused by female prospective drivers. Likewise, a hair salon may be more critical of male hairdressers. Public opinion does not prevent you from achieving a particular goal, but it can make it more difficult. This bias can go either way, but women do seem to get the worse end of the stick.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Good point that public opinion can impede progress in a given domain however due to recent changes over the past few years I am no longer convinced that it is more difficult to women. Girls of all ages do better than boys in education so public opinion is often that girls are more mature and better students. At the moment in the UK women in their 20s and 30s are out earning men and there is a 2:1 ratio for employing women in STEMM careers. There are female scholarships and female only groups at university, and the only courses where there is a lack of women are in computer science and engineering, not the maths or sciences. Finally women make up the majority of the electorate and feminism and political correctness has a strong hold on the media.
    In short women have the power to change public opinion and this is evident in western society, so I do not understand why they are acting as though they are still oppressed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teslamegafan)
    Since you have 'lost internet connection' or been distracted by another thread rather than refuting my argument I must come to the conclusion that I am right and that women are no more oppressed than men in our society.

    Have a good night
    Not really - like I said at the outset, I'm not engaging with someone who can't discuss constructively. When I presented you with examples of male privilege, you shifted the goalposts and said you wanted oppression by the law. By that logic, people of colour should stop complaining about the disproportionate number of stop and searches carried out on them, because they have the same legal rights as (for instance) white people when those searches are carried out.

    I'm not in the market for a high school debating partner, given that I came into the thread to post as a trans person, so I won't be responding to you further. For the avoidance of doubt, this in no way reflects the strength of your argument - it reflects the limits of my patience.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by =incognito=)
    Not really - like I said at the outset, I'm not engaging with someone who can't discuss constructively. When I presented you with examples of male privilege, you shifted the goalposts and said you wanted oppression by the law. By that logic, people of colour should stop complaining about the disproportionate number of stop and searches carried out on them, because they have the same legal rights as (for instance) white people when those searches are carried out.

    I'm not in the market for a high school debating partner, given that I came into the thread to post as a trans person, so I won't be responding to you further. For the avoidance of doubt, this in no way reflects the strength of your argument - it reflects the limits of my patience.
    Sorry that I wasn't clear a the outset that true inequality is evidenced by differences in the laws: my points still stand. Goodbye.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teslamegafan)
    Good point that public opinion can impede progress in a given domain however due to recent changes over the past few years I am no longer convinced that it is more difficult to women. Girls of all ages do better than boys in education so public opinion is often that girls are more mature and better students. At the moment in the UK women in their 20s and 30s are out earning men and there is a 2:1 ratio for employing women in STEMM careers. There are female scholarships and female only groups at university, and the only courses where there is a lack of women are in computer science and engineering, not the maths or sciences. Finally women make up the majority of the electorate and feminism and political correctness has a strong hold on the media.
    In short women have the power to change public opinion and this is evident in western society, so I do not understand why they are acting as though they are still oppressed.
    At the end of the day, you are correct in that women are no longer oppressed in many ways. The current balance of oppression is about even. So, I agree that the feminist narrative is in many cases a simplification. I also think that males will have it tough over the next century, probably tougher than women. Yet, you have to realise that feminists will often point to examples from 50+ years ago as evidence. The problem is that the situation changes very quickly. However, just because women are very successful at the moment does not mean we should seek to bring them down, rather it should motivate us to up our game and encourage young boys to have high aspirations in a way that is positive. And sadly the laddish culture is not just sexist but anti-academic.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bjornhattan)
    At the end of the day, you are correct in that women are no longer oppressed in many ways. The current balance of oppression is about even. So, I agree that the feminist narrative is in many cases a simplification. I also think that males will have it tough over the next century, probably tougher than women. Yet, you have to realise that feminists will often point to examples from 50+ years ago as evidence. The problem is that the situation changes very quickly. However, just because women are very successful at the moment does not mean we should seek to bring them down, rather it should motivate us to up our game and encourage young boys to have high aspirations in a way that is positive. And sadly the laddish culture is not just sexist but anti-academic.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I completely agree with what you're saying. I personally think to prepare for social change in the 21st century we should avoid words like feminism or men's rights which exclude half of the population and adopt egalitarianism so we can focus on the issues that really matter, like sexism in the Middle East.
    Arguing over semantics is boring but important.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teslamegafan)
    It seems what you're saying is gender differences are the result of biology while racial differences are socially constructed. So if it turned out that women are inferior in certain jobs e.g. as CEOs, would you stick to your biology argument or will you say that it is actually a social construct based on what toys they were given during childhood or something?
    How exactly would it "turn out" to be true? 'Skill at a job' is difficult to quantify.
    Also, every person is different- even if it were proved that there are less women than men who are capable at some particular skill, that doesn't mean that a particular woman is necessarily inferior than men with a similar background. In the same way, women supposedly perform better on average in measures of social intelligence than men, but that doesn't mean a particular man cannot be just as capable of being socially sensitive.

    In any case, that's irrelevant to my argument. Of course gender isn't just a social construct; from evolution males would be selected for different traits than females so it would be logical that a person who is a particular gender is more likely (but not necessary) to show traits typical of that gender than a person of the other gender. Animals of different gender show differences in behaviour- it's even been shown that monkeys show "typical" gender-specific toy preferences.

    A transgender person would, for whatever reason, feel that they prefer to be in the other gender's role in society, and there is evidence that transgender people are likely to be born with a brain structure atypical to their gender - brain scans of female-to-male transgender people have shown that their brains are masculinised, whereas male-to-female transgender people's brains have seemed to be halfway in between typical male and female brains in structure.

    In comparison, racism aside, people of different races don't show any differences in types of intelligence, behaviour or personality that are race-specific and not learned. I suppose you could use 'transrace' of a person of a certain race who was brought up in a different culture to that of their genetic family, but it is basically redundant since physical appearances aside, there are no race-specific biological differences. If you have "transrace" you might as well call adopted children "transfamily" if they consider themselves more a member of their adopted family than their genetic one.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pronged Lily)
    'Transrace' Chinese would mean you feel that are 'in spirit Chinese' but got somehow stuck in the body of a *insert your race here*.

    But race, unlike gender, doesn't define/change who you are (expected to be) as a person, so surely it loses its meaning in this context...
    I think transrace as an idea is a bit of a joke, but I vehemently disagree with this quote. Race often has a close and intense relationship to culture. Some people would definitely argue that they define their personhood by their race...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teslamegafan)
    I completely agree with what you're saying. I personally think to prepare for social change in the 21st century we should avoid words like feminism or men's rights which exclude half of the population and adopt egalitarianism so we can focus on the issues that really matter, like sexism in the Middle East.
    Arguing over semantics is boring but important.
    Yes, I'm sick to death of white, middle class feminism.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by YellowWallpaper)
    I think transrace as an idea is a bit of a joke, but I vehemently disagree with this quote. Race often has a close and intense relationship to culture. Some people would definitely argue that they define their personhood by their race...
    What I mean is that, yes of course your culture and background changes/defines you as a person, just as your life experiences shape who you are as a person, but if you were brought up in a different culture, you would see yourself as part of that culture instead- it doesn't define your brain structure or the way that you think from birth in the same way.

    If, theoretically, you and everyone else was convinced that you were a different race and you grew up in that way, you wouldn't know to feel uncomfortable in being defined as part of that culture (in the way that transgender people feel innately uncomfortable with their gender from an early age) until someone told you who your real family were and their history- and even then you would likely still identify to a large extent with the culture you grew up in because those were your experiences.

    It's the culture associated with the that is defines you, not the genetics of that race specifically, and the culture you identify with is based on your experiences. These experiences are usually associated with your family (and genetics) anyway because of upbringing and where you lived, but if they were to be separated you wouldn't feel (without being told) that you didn't belong somehow.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EC3)
    Exactly the question I have pondering over. We don't get to decide neither our gender nor our race. Why is it ok to want to change gender but not race? If we at the past 200 years, Changing your gender and race could both have effects on social status. For example, the socioeconomic status of White Males would've been considerably better compared to a black female.
    False. We do get to decide our gender, which in my opinion is wonderful. You're doing what everyone always does and saying that sex = gender. As a psych and sociology student I can tell you that gender is a social construct, it's not a thing that can be easily labeled. The idea of gender is also incredibly amazingly fragile, and because of this a lot of people don't identify with any of the labels which are available. (Me being one of those people.)
    Furthermore, even if you meant that we don't get to decide our sex, that's also false, as advancements in science and surgery mean that we can now (at a price) also change our sex.

    Race, on the other hand, is a completely different matter, and comparing the two is like comparing umbrellas to elephants. They aren't alike at all, and thus are two entirely different subjects.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Imagine being this daft
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MJlover)
    nope lol what do you mean?
    Sorry didn't see your post. I was jokingly referring to Mutually Assured Destruction in the WW3 of gender politics; I'm not a psychopath I swear
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pronged Lily)
    How exactly would it "turn out" to be true? 'Skill at a job' is difficult to quantify.
    Also, every person is different- even if it were proved that there are less women than men who are capable at some particular skill, that doesn't mean that a particular woman is necessarily inferior than men with a similar background. In the same way, women supposedly perform better on average in measures of social intelligence than men, but that doesn't mean a particular man cannot be just as capable of being socially sensitive.

    In any case, that's irrelevant to my argument. Of course gender isn't just a social construct; from evolution males would be selected for different traits than females so it would be logical that a person who is a particular gender is more likely (but not necessary) to show traits typical of that gender than a person of the other gender. Animals of different gender show differences in behaviour- it's even been shown that monkeys show "typical" gender-specific toy preferences.

    A transgender person would, for whatever reason, feel that they prefer to be in the other gender's role in society, and there is evidence that transgender people are likely to be born with a brain structure atypical to their gender - brain scans of female-to-male transgender people have shown that their brains are masculinised, whereas male-to-female transgender people's brains have seemed to be halfway in between typical male and female brains in structure.

    In comparison, racism aside, people of different races don't show any differences in types of intelligence, behaviour or personality that are race-specific and not learned. I suppose you could use 'transrace' of a person of a certain race who was brought up in a different culture to that of their genetic family, but it is basically redundant since physical appearances aside, there are no race-specific biological differences. If you have "transrace" you might as well call adopted children "transfamily" if they consider themselves more a member of their adopted family than their genetic one.
    The CEO example was there to showcase the feminist tendency to switch between biological and social arguments as it suits them whether or not there is factual evidence. E.g. women are strong and capable so should be allowed into all army personnel jobs but men shouldn't hit women because women are physically weaker. Feminist hypocrisy at its finest.
    However, that's another issue. The main argument you were making was that gender change is more transformational than race change. You are saying that to be transgender one requires a difference in brain structure but to be transrace one only needs to be raised in a different culture like an adopted child. However, are we not disregarding the physical differences between races like skin colour or less noticeable features like plica palpebronasalis; I doubt these traits are the result of upbringing. My point is if we had treatments to engineer these physical transformations that differentiate between races, ergo becoming transrace, how would that be any different from the transgender treatments we have today.

    EDIT: did not see that you said physical differences aside. Nevertheless I seem to have lost track of the argument. The fact that the emphasis for transgender people to stand out is to become more masculine/feminine looking suggests that the physical characteristics matter more than any other in such transformations. If people are allowed to undergo transgender treatments are now why wouldn't the same logic apply to race change in the future if we get the technology. Such reiterating the initial premise: if transgender why not transrace?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Since when can you change your race?

    :/
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pizzad0gs)
    False. We do get to decide our gender, which in my opinion is wonderful. You're doing what everyone always does and saying that sex = gender. As a psych and sociology student I can tell you that gender is a social construct, it's not a thing that can be easily labeled. The idea of gender is also incredibly amazingly fragile, and because of this a lot of people don't identify with any of the labels which are available. (Me being one of those people.)
    Furthermore, even if you meant that we don't get to decide our sex, that's also false, as advancements in science and surgery mean that we can now (at a price) also change our sex.

    Race, on the other hand, is a completely different matter, and comparing the two is like comparing umbrellas to elephants. They aren't alike at all, and thus are two entirely different subjects.
    There are physical differences caused by race just as there are physical differences caused by gender. The whole point of this thread is to argue that if transgender surgery is real and accepted now, then if technology allows it race change surgery should be permitted in the future. It sounds strange but it is the same logic. All or nothing: if transgender why not hypothetically transrace?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teslamegafan)
    There are physical differences caused by race just as there are physical differences caused by gender. The whole point of this thread is to argue that if transgender surgery is real and accepted now, then if technology allows it race change surgery should be permitted in the future. It sounds strange but it is the same logic. All or nothing: if transgender why not hypothetically transrace?
    Nope, there are no physical differences caused by gender. I'll say this again, because you clearly brushed over my comment as if it were nothing, sex and gender are not the same thing.
    "Race surgery" should not be permitted because you can't just "identify" as another race like you can do with gender - there are different brain patterns in people who identify as female, male, and everything in between. I'm done here, no use arguing with someone who honestly believes "transrace" should be a thing, lmao.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stoltguyboo)
    Since when can you change your race?

    :/
    Transrace makes just as much sense as transgender, that is, not a lot. If transgender people are becoming accepted why not transracial people. The future is a blurry mess of trans (insert identity): are you excited!

    I know I am :dance:
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 29, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.