Adnan Sami on Kangana Controversy - Page 4

Originally posted by: malikakas

You've basically proven my point by using the word "violently". Neither JK Rowling nor the other woman that was fired encouraged violence against Trans people. And by your own definition of protected people, Trans would have had the advantage of male privilege before they transitioned, so why shouldn't some people consider cis women as more disadvantaged requiring protection? 

Encouraging discrimination is a form of social violence. Like I said to HearMeRoar, violence doesn't only mean punching or murdering people. 

Also, transwomen are bullied much more than cis women because of their feminine mannerisms in a male body. Society makes their lives hell, and they are equally at risk of sexual violence as cis women are. 

Originally posted by: Hello_kitta

How dare Kangna have FoE . It's only reserved for vir sandas . 

You're trolling, right? 

Originally posted by: Ashley.Tisdale

Yeah but looking at the content...I'd rather stay away, sorry 😆

 Kangana can make people wanna leave earth 😂 

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

He's right. 

A dog is barking and every time it barks we go "oh my god a dog is barking, how dare dogs bark."

If people just ignore her it won't matter. 

Originally posted by: Mahisa_22

Encouraging discrimination is a form of social violence. Like I said to HearMeRoar, violence doesn't only mean punching or murdering people. 

Also, transwomen are bullied much more than cis women because of their feminine mannerisms in a male body. Society makes their lives hell, and they are equally at risk of sexual violence as cis women are. 

I am not sure your definition is correct. Violence is refers to something that is done in a forceful or physical manner. So forced displacement or segregation is an example of social violence that doesn't include punching etc. But bringing forth ideas that suggest an intersectionality within different discriminated groups should not come under that category. To do so prevents reasonable debate and potentially contributes to other forms of discrimination. 

Sure female mannerisms in a male body may have had to face their share of bullying. But is that really worse than what cis women have had to historically face? In many cases women were considered property, not equal in any way. Even up til 2013, the British monarchy had a male primogeniture pattern of inheritance, meaning females would fall behind males in the line of succession. Even currently British dukedoms are passed along the male line. This is a kind of discrimination that someone born with XY chromosomes do not have to face. The former is societal bullying which even women with male characteristics face (even if they still identify as female), the latter is a lack of equality in legal rights in even one of the more progressive places of the world where JK Rowling is from. 

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Who decides what is discrimination? You claim it's a no-brainer, but what you're saying seems more like historical ignorance. 

The law decides what is discrimination. And it is a complicated legal process and the results are never accurate. 

We can all accuse each other of hate speech or discrimination online. It's easy to make value judgments based on our personal morals and we often do. But to legally prove it - we have to meet the complex burden of truth. 

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Let's say, I, as a woman, do not want trans women with male equipment in female shelters, acc to you, it is discrimination.

Might I remind you, these trans women, under their male identity, would've been able to own property, vote, work a job they wanted, play sports, join the military, become priests, even beat their wives if they so felt inclined, only a 100-some years ago while biological women wouldn't.

So why would women - a group MORE discriminated against since the beginning of humanity - be asked to give up their safety and security? 

A sexually assaulted woman who takes shelter in GOVERNMENT-RUN safe place has to face the same situation she ran from according to you. All to favor a group  that is in with the woke crowd now.

If I speak against it, acc to you, it comes under hate speech. Fortunately for me, it's not the case in the United States. You could look it up. I can shout it from the rooftop, and the government can't do a single thing to me. And I do not want the country to go to a situation where I can't object to it. 

I believe that trans women are women. I honestly don't know if it is hate speech to call them men. But I feel it is unkind to refer to anyone by names and genders they do not wish to be used. 

That being said I will acknowledge that sometimes the trans-rights movement doesn't allow for constructive debate. Some conservative groups too, don't want a constructive debate either. 

The example you cite of a government shelter is a pretty good one. Some women who have been sexually assaulted by men can be triggered by the presence of men - some to the point that it damages relationships with their male family and friends. Pre-op trans women or trans masculine women can cause sexually assaulted women to be triggered. At the same time, it can be unfair to trans women too because they too often have trauma. Trans women have been violently assaulted in male shelters too and feel unsafe in male shelters. Each side has a point and society is grappling with it. I don't think we can reach a solution unless both sides of the issue cast aside their anger and bitterness and try to have a dialogue. We need a channel where victims of domestic violence and sexual assault of all gender identities, sexual identities, etc. can come together to inform the government on how best to run shelters. 

There are many other areas where dialogue and data gathering and studies are needed. 

Originally posted by: Hello_kitta

How dare Kangna have FoE . It's only reserved for vir sandas . 

If you say so!!!!! 

You got the name of Vir Das wrong. I am sure it was by mistake since you seem to be so sensible otherwise.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

The law decides what is discrimination. And it is a complicated legal process and the results are never accurate. 

We can all accuse each other of hate speech or discrimination online. It's easy to make value judgments based on our personal morals and we often do. But to legally prove it - we have to meet the complex burden of truth. 

I believe that trans women are women. I honestly don't know if it is hate speech to call them men. But I feel it is unkind to refer to anyone by names and genders they do not wish to be used. 

That being said I will acknowledge that sometimes the trans-rights movement doesn't allow for constructive debate. Some conservative groups too, don't want a constructive debate either. 

The example you cite of a government shelter is a pretty good one. Some women who have been sexually assaulted by men can be triggered by the presence of men - some to the point that it damages relationships with their male family and friends. Pre-op trans women or trans masculine women can cause sexually assaulted women to be triggered. At the same time, it can be unfair to trans women too because they too often have trauma. Trans women have been violently assaulted in male shelters too and feel unsafe in male shelters. Each side has a point and society is grappling with it. I don't think we can reach a solution unless both sides of the issue cast aside their anger and bitterness and try to have a dialogue. We need a channel where victims of domestic violence and sexual assault of all gender identities, sexual identities, etc. can come together to inform the government on how best to run shelters. 

There are many other areas where dialogue and data gathering and studies are needed. 

Re: discrimination. I meant discrimination in speech, not in deed, which of course is illegal. Speech can be as loathsome as speaker wants it to be. I can choose not to listen. 

See, I want trans women and men to have every right to lead happy and healthy lives just like someone who is cis. 

Calling someone name/pronouns of their preference is something well within their right to demand. I'd be pissed if someone called me by masculine pronouns. Only suggestion would be to stick to easy to remember usages. I can easily go with he/she and will remember they/them. If you (generic you) ask me to remember xe, ze etc, I'll prob decide it's easier not to talk to you. 

Where I feel the need to draw the line is where safety of biological women is concerned. I am 50/50 on the issue of sports. But safety is something that I just cannot fathom why women should be asked to give up.

And it's not about trans women attacking although there have been a small number. Can anyone tell me male prisoners won't claim they're trans to be moved to a female prison? Can someone assure women that some as yet unrecognized cis male criminal won't walk into a shelter, claiming to be trans? Can someone tell me some horny teenage boy won't simply claim to be trans to go into the girls locker room? Will it be OK if a 5 year old girl is in the bathroom alone with a 17 yo claiming to be trans? 

The whole reason for segregating genders in such circumstances was not that society believed every male to be a potential criminal. It was because women felt the need for privacy and security given that most attacks on women were carried out by men. The acceptance of transwomen with male genitalia intact will send us straight back to the era where such facilities did not exist for women. 

There has to be an answer for sure. But why is it that the only solution society can think of is for biological women to give up their safety?

Not you, but I've been called a TERF for this opinion. I don't want to be seen as exclusionary, but it's come to a point where I'm ok with it. I feel women who haven't ever been at the receiving end of sexism and misogyny and attacks do not get why those who have are fierce about protecting their hard-won right to be safe and happy.  I mean... travel in a local train in certain parts of India and tell me you don't need Ladies Only compartments.

Originally posted by: malikakas

I am not sure your definition is correct. Violence is refers to something that is done in a forceful or physical manner. So forced displacement or segregation is an example of social violence that doesn't include punching etc. But bringing forth ideas that suggest an intersectionality within different discriminated groups should not come under that category. To do so prevents reasonable debate and potentially contributes to other forms of discrimination. 

Sure female mannerisms in a male body may have had to face their share of bullying. But is that really worse than what cis women have had to historically face? In many cases women were considered property, not equal in any way. Even up til 2013, the British monarchy had a male primogeniture pattern of inheritance, meaning females would fall behind males in the line of succession. Even currently British dukedoms are passed along the male line. This is a kind of discrimination that someone born with XY chromosomes do not have to face. The former is societal bullying which even women with male characteristics face (even if they still identify as female), the latter is a lack of equality in legal rights in even one of the more progressive places of the world where JK Rowling is from. 

The kind of bullying trans people face is of a different level. They are bullied on a day-to-day basis, bullied simply for existing. At least cis women, however oppressed, are still accepted as part of the social framework. Trans people are not. And the pressure to appear 'manly' is much more on people born male. Masculine women, while ridiculed, don't have that pressure to put their femininity on "display" as men are forced to be 'MARD'. 

'Don't be a girl', 'dont be a sissy',  are much more strongly used ridicules, than 'You're too manly'. 

Originally posted by: Mahisa_22

  

The kind of bullying trans people face is of a different level. They are bullied on a day-to-day basis, bullied simply for existing. At least cis women, however oppressed, are still accepted as part of the social framework. Trans people are not. And the pressure to appear 'manly' is much more on people born male. Masculine women, while ridiculed, don't have that pressure to put their femininity on "display" as men are forced to be 'MARD'. 

'Don't be a girl', 'dont be a sissy',  are much more strongly used ridicules, than 'You're too manly'. 

A lot of those terms are related to the fact that historically women have been considered lesser beings. "You suck" as a pejorative for example is related to a sexual role that is routinely delegated to women. The oppression of women is so mainstream that most women think it is the norm to be treated like that.

2 examples: 

1) Women and men reciting the exact same scripted conversation yet its the women who are perceived as less intelligent for doing the exact same thing as a man. 

"By playing clips of carefully scripted conversations to 5,000 Americans, Hilton was able to investigate people's perceptions of different speakers. Sometimes those reading the scripts were male. Sometimes they were female. Did the gender of the speaker make a difference to listeners' assessments of whether the speaker was rude or just excited, even though the scripts were exactly the same?

It did. Hilton "found a gender disparity among survey participants," reports Stanford News. "Male listeners were more likely to view women who interrupted another speaker in the audio clips as ruder, less friendly, and less intelligent than men who interrupted.""

www.inc.com/jessica-stillman/what-counts-as-a-rude-interruption-depends-on-your-gender-study-confirms.html

2) Barbara Barres transitioned to Ben Barres at the age of 40 and commented on his experiences as compared to when he was recognized as a woman.

 “It was only changing sex at the age of 40 and experiencing life from the vantage of a man that I finally came to be fully aware of these barriers,” he writes. “People who don’t know I am transgender [now] treat me with much more respect. I can even complete a whole sentence without being interrupted by a man,” Barres wrote in a Nature commentary in 2006. After Barres gave a talk as Ben, he heard an audience member remark, “Ben Barres gave a great seminar today, but then his work is much better than his sister’s."

www.nature.com/scitable/content/does-gender-matter-by-ben-a-barres-10602856/

The oppression of women is incredibly pervasive. That's not to say trans people don't have their share of struggles but you can't undermine the degree of oppression women have had to face in the past and continue to face in order to further a certain agenda with trans rights. Unfortunately there are places where the rights of the two groups come into conflict with each other. Silencing what could be meaningful discussion on these issues just further subjugates women.