Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Clippings from news sources involving fashion freedom and other gender equality issues.
Yonkas
Active Member
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:28 am
Location: Buffalo, NY
Contact:

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Yonkas »

pelmut wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2020 8:40 am
Very well explained, Yonkas; I agree with everything you have said.
Thanks.
Sinned wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2020 12:23 pm
Yonkas,that is a very well-written piece of work. Easy to follow even for a non-sociologist like me. Well done.
Thank you, also. I am not a sociologist either.
Ray wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:50 pm
Yonkas,

Cogently constructed, and presented in a polite manner with a dash of humour. I like it.

I've also marked you out as someone I would have trouble debating with! I'd probably lose.... :-)
Heheh. Arguing on the internet is difficult, and is an ongoing learning experience for me. Don't worry about losing. One can win a debate and still be wrong. Worry about being wrong :D.

Also, we need not have a debate just because we differ in opinion. I prefer having discussions to debates because, in my opinion, debates are about dominating, whereas discussions are about finding a shared understanding. If two people have a debate, unless they are master interlocutors, odds are, neither will ever concede a micrometer of ground, because the point is to win, and not to be right. Whereas discussions are all about listening to what the each other has to say, internalizing it, and learning from it.

Coder
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 171
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 4:40 am

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Coder »

Yonkas wrote:
Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:22 am
Whereas discussions are all about listening to what the each other has to say, internalizing it, and learning from it.
And this is why I prefer forums over most other forms of social media, greater chance of a discussion happening!

Yonkas
Active Member
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:28 am
Location: Buffalo, NY
Contact:

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Yonkas »

Coder wrote:
Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:25 am
Yonkas wrote:
Mon Feb 03, 2020 2:22 am
Whereas discussions are all about listening to what the each other has to say, internalizing it, and learning from it.
And this is why I prefer forums over most other forms of social media, greater chance of a discussion happening!
That's true, as long as everybody participating understands the rules of engagement. In my experience, few people understand how to have a fair discussion, let alone debate. Despite that, it helps to have a shared belief system, or common goal, which is, in our case skirts/kilts for men.

pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by pelmut »

Not to add fuel to the fire, but purely for information:
Gene variants provide insight into brain, body incongruence in transgender
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.

Ralph
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 336
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Ralph »

Now I have to wonder, is the brain difference the cause of the gender dysphoria or is the gender dysphoria the cause of the brain difference?

That is to say, if I believe down to my innermost core that I am a dachshund, that I was meant to be a dachshund, that I need surgery to make my body image match my inner identity, would that cause nonstandard variations in my brain to occur?
Ralph!

pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by pelmut »

I've just met a nonstandard variation wandering around looking lost, it says it can't find the brain it is supposed to be in.


:-)
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.

Yonkas
Active Member
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:28 am
Location: Buffalo, NY
Contact:

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Yonkas »

Ralph wrote:
Fri Feb 07, 2020 9:20 pm
Now I have to wonder, is the brain difference the cause of the gender dysphoria or is the gender dysphoria the cause of the brain difference?
According to the article, neither. Rather, it is a function of levels of androgen/estrogen the brain is exposed to during prenatal development.
Ralph wrote:
Fri Feb 07, 2020 9:20 pm
That is to say, if I believe down to my innermost core that I am a dachshund, that I was meant to be a dachshund, that I need surgery to make my body image match my inner identity, would that cause nonstandard variations in my brain to occur?
You have to be careful with such analogies, though. I get where you are coming from, but a person might find your particular analogy offensive. Also, I don't believe it is a valid analogy.

Analogies only work when there is a convincing 1-1 correspondence between all the relevant parts of the situation. In my opinion, your analogy immediately fails because one of the relevant parts is state-of-mind, which is problematic in the case of human->daschund, since dogs decidedly have vastly different brains from our own.

When a person claims to have a gender different from their birth sex, it is plausible to me, because
1) males and females have comparable levels of intelligence.
2) there do seem to be statistically significant intellectual/emotional differences between males and females.
3) despite these differences, males and females have identifiably human thought patterns and behaviors.
4) and finally, there is no reason to believe that the circumstances that lead to the development of external sexual characteristics are the same circumstances that lead to a brain exhibiting the thought patterns/behaviors of 3.

This is not the case with humans and dogs. It isn't even close. So, if a person tells me that they feel like a dachshund internally, they would have to convince me that their minds truly are doglike.

Furthermore, there don't seem to be any biological pathways that would produce this--or if they are, they aren't widely recognized (though, I acknowledge that there are some people who view their inner selves as other species). So, we are talking about two very different issues, which, on account of their extensive differences, might require vastly different treatments. The medical community has studied transgenderism and has determined that, thus far, the best treatment is to allow the sufferer to transition to the other sex (though, I must note that the candidate must go through an extensive number of rigorous psychological examinations before being declared fit for this treatment. I believe the trans community refers to psychologists as "gatekeepers." for this reason). They have not studied transspeciesism and arrived at the same conclusion.

pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by pelmut »

Ralph wrote:
Fri Feb 07, 2020 9:20 pm
Now I have to wonder, is the brain difference the cause of the gender dysphoria or is the gender dysphoria the cause of the brain difference? :ugeek:
Gender dysphoria is brought on by the interaction of several factors: the person's gender does not align with their body in the way Society thinks it should.  The person themself is also a member of Society and has the same expectations as the people around them, so they are unhappy because their body isn't the way that they (as a member of Society) think it should be.

The brain difference in question looks as though it could be one of the factors causing the person's gender to be as it is, but their endocrinal difference is well established as one of the factors causing their body to be the way it is -- and traditional teaching is one of the factors causing Society to be the way it is.  All these factors (and probably a lot more we haven't identified yet) contribute to gender dysphoria, but it doesn't make sense to single out just one of them as the cause.

Your question is an interesting one, because the stress of gender dysphoria may well have an effect on the brain, so the next study ought to compare transgender people who are not strongly gender dysphoric (perhaps because of the type of Society they live in) with people who have other types of dysphoria (colour, age, disfigurement etc.) but who are not transgender.
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.

Dust
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2018 7:03 pm

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Dust »

I understand the problems with the dog analogy. Let's look at some other human differences, though.

Many physical sex differences are on a spectrum, with quite a bit of overlap. Take facial hair. Some guys cannot grow any to save their lives. This is common among men of Asian or native American ancestry. On the other hand, there are women who spend a lot of effort removing unwanted facial hair. Mustache hair growth in women is common among Italians for instance. No one says this makes the men, women or the women, men. The same point could be made with height distributions, bone structure, and more.

Why then, when people show personality traits that are outside the norm for their sex, do we even contemplate the idea that they might really be the other gender? Can't we just accept some more variation and overlap?

Yonkas
Active Member
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:28 am
Location: Buffalo, NY
Contact:

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Yonkas »

Dust wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 1:09 am
I understand the problems with the dog analogy. Let's look at some other human differences, though.

Many physical sex differences are on a spectrum, with quite a bit of overlap. Take facial hair. Some guys cannot grow any to save their lives. This is common among men of Asian or native American ancestry. On the other hand, there are women who spend a lot of effort removing unwanted facial hair. Mustache hair growth in women is common among Italians for instance. No one says this makes the men, women or the women, men. The same point could be made with height distributions, bone structure, and more.

Why then, when people show personality traits that are outside the norm for their sex, do we even contemplate the idea that they might really be the other gender? Can't we just accept some more variation and overlap?
Some of us can. Most of us wouldn't even humor the thought. And that's the problem we are dealing with right now. Most of society dismisses those outliers as perversions without a second thought. I believe that once transgender-ism becomes normalized, more of us will be able to do what you ask. But that alone likely will not mean gender dysphoria will go away. That's because sexual dimorphism seems to be strongly baked into humans.

So, yes, you are completely correct that both sexes run the gamut of physical characteristics. But, how many women and men do you know who feel that facial hair is flattering on a woman? Not many, I'd wager. Hell, height has always seemed to me to be a silly characteristic to correlate with sexual attractiveness, and yet, I have known very few women that considered being tall a positive trait for themselves, or other women (which surprises me, since I consider it so little in my own rankings of physical trait attractiveness).

That's the whole point. It isn't that we consider a tall woman with facial hair outside the realm of possibility, it's that humans, whether by quirk of society, or biology, don't consider these attributes to align with femininity; they consider them as disharmonious with being female. It is possible, and maybe even tolerated, but not accepted, and if it originates in our biology, and not in society, I suspect it never completely will be.

Rather, I suspect that we will always have to actively foster this sense of open-mindedness through education, much like we do with morals and critical thinking (and look how

In light of this, I think that it is much easier, at least at this point, to accept some level of enforced sexual dimorphism as a compromise for allowing individuals to live as they want to, instead of requiring society to to completely shed something so fundamental to it.

By the way, just in case, please don't confuse what I am saying with the idea that gender expression should be limited to one's sex. But, sexual characteristics aren't gender expression--at least not for most people. Gender expression isn't your body. It is how you adorn your body. That's why it is possible to have masculine presenting transwomen and feminine presenting transmen (https://www.intomore.com/impact/femme-t ... expression). That's also why it's possible for people like me to claim to be 100% male (born, and raised) despite wishing to wear the prettiest, flowiest, most feminine garments possible (as long as I find it flattering to myself).

By the way, I emphatically recommend you read the accounts in that link. It should disabuse any notion that transgender individuals just want to dress up as the other sex. It runs much, much, deeper than that.

User avatar
Freedomforall
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 700
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:00 pm

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Freedomforall »

Trying to wrap my head around the content of the article. It is reminiscent of my high school days studying calculus.

Stu
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Stu »

I have said before that we do not have any ownership of the pronouns people use with regard to us; the choice of pronouns rests with the speaker and not the referent. Pronouns are not like names or titles, which are determined by the individual referred to; they are function words and a property of the language. I will use "he/him" if the person presents as male and "she/her" if the person presents as female - not that presents is the determining factor. The pronouns they and them only apply if I am referring to two or more people, or a person referred to is absent and their sex is unknown and cannot be readily ascertained.

Yonkas
Active Member
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 5:28 am
Location: Buffalo, NY
Contact:

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Yonkas »

Stu wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:32 pm
I have said before that we do not have any ownership of the pronouns people use with regard to us; the choice of pronouns rests with the speaker and not the referent.
But that's true of all descriptive language.

You don't have ownership of whether I call you a twat, or not, but it would certainly be impolite for me to do so (and I am not calling you a twat, by the way). Women don't have ownership over whether or not I refer to them all as broads. Similarly, it would be impolite for me to call you a transvestite after you set the record straight and told me that you are not trying to present as a woman, but are only trying to have as much fashion freedom as women have. That doesn't change, when you are not in the room to hear me. If I call you a transvestite, then, I am still acknowledging that I don't respect you enough to accept that you know yourself better than I do. Not to mention that permitting myself this luxury increases the possibility that I will forget not to do it to your face, or that word won't spread

In light of that, I don't really see a difference with pronouns. Yes, it's difficult at first to adjust your language, but that gets easier with time. What doesn't get easier with time is being in a society where disrespect against your person is institutionalized as it is for transgender individuals.
Stu wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:32 pm
Pronouns are not like names or titles, which are determined by the individual referred to; they are function words and a property of the language.
Well, I don't really agree with that, but let's say that's true. So what? Language changes to accommodate historical trends.

It used to be absolutely acceptable to refer to people with Down Syndrome as Mongoloid, or to refer to people with interracial ancestry as mulatto. It no longer is.
Stu wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 3:32 pm
I will use "he/him" if the person presents as male and "she/her" if the person presents as female - not that presents is the determining factor. The pronouns they and them only apply if I am referring to two or more people, or a person referred to is absent and their sex is unknown and cannot be readily ascertained.
But what if you're mistaken? I know I have been. Indeed, people have even mistaken my gender, and I have never looked particularly feminine.

And, what if you're walking around in a skirt (or kilt), and some moron calls you "Miss," because you're wearing "women's clothes," and "only women and 'shemales'" do that. Would you take that as a sign of respect, or disrespect? Would you expect every man in this position to shrug it off, or would you expect a significant number of them to take offense? Would the original offender then be justified in continuing to refer to you in this manner, even after you've corrected him?

Furthermore, non-trans people have been evicted from bathrooms because other people mistook their sex-atypical features to be a sign that they were transgender.

So, what would you do to account for this, once somebody corrects you? Surely you wouldn't ask them to prove it to you. That would be impolite, and might even earn you a "f**k off." I'd wager it would be easier for you to say, "sorry," and be on your way, than to escalate things.

In my opinion, it's ok to mistakenly misgender a person. You should get a pass for that. But, any intentional misgendering is a sign of disrespect.

But, again, it is your right to refer to people however they want. Just don't expect others to be ok with it.

Stu
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 8:25 am
Location: Sweden

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by Stu »

Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
You don't have ownership of whether I call you a twat,
No, but that is just mindless abuse, directed at a person. There is a vast difference between a term which is designed to be abusive and a function word such as a pronoun which is used to refer to a person to a third party.
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
it would be impolite for me to call you a transvestite after you set the record straight and told me that you are not trying to present as a woman
The issue isn't one of politeness, but of accuracy. It would be objectively inaccurate for you to call me a transvestite
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
In light of that, I don't really see a difference with pronouns.
I think I have explained the difference.
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
It used to be absolutely acceptable to refer to people with Down Syndrome as Mongoloid, or to refer to people with interracial ancestry as mulatto. It no longer is.
Says who? To whom have we conferred the authority to proscribe words in our language? I don't recall being consulted on that. Whenever we do that to a perfectly usable word, we empower it to be used as a weapon. We need to stop doing that sit is counter-productive.
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
Language changes to accommodate historical trends.
Who decides on these changes? I haven't consented to my language being changed in that way. In fact, many of these supposed changes have been imposed upon the speech community by some self-appointed group of opinionated individuals - a phenomenon known as "political correctness". They can kiss my backside.
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
And, what if you're walking around in a skirt (or kilt), and some moron calls you "Miss," because you're wearing "women's clothes,"


I couldn't give a stuff. It is objectively untrue and I am only offended by that if I allow myself to be so offended - and I don't.
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
Would you expect every man in this position to shrug it off,
Yup. They are either being sincere and mistaking me for a woman, in which case I would correct them, or else they are trying to verbally abuse me, in which case I would return the compliment in kind. But again you are talking about an address and not a referring expression and that is quite different
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
Furthermore, non-trans people have been evicted from bathrooms because other people mistook their sex-atypical features to be a sign that they were transgender.
OK. And how is that relevant to what I said?
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
But, any intentional misgendering is a sign of disrespect.
I have not suggested I would do any such thing. I said I would refer to them (i.e. to a third party) as they appear to be. Someone who is obviously male and indicates their sex by their signifiers, e.g. a full beard and male clothing, or who attempts to present as male, would be referred to as "he/him". Someone who presents as female would be referred to as "she/her". It is really not difficult or unreasonable.
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
But, again, it is your right to refer to people however they want. Just don't expect others to be ok with it.
If they don't like it, then they can either explain what the problem is, or else they can go and have a cry about it. That's their problem.

pelmut
Member Extraordinaire
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:36 am
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Nice article that mentions Skirtcafe favorably

Post by pelmut »

Stu wrote:
Wed Feb 12, 2020 3:52 pm
Yonkas wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 4:19 pm
But, any intentional misgendering is a sign of disrespect.
I have not suggested I would do any such thing. I said I would refer to them (i.e. to a third party) as they appear to be. Someone who is obviously male and indicates their sex by their signifiers, e.g. a full beard and male clothing, or who attempts to present as male, would be referred to as "he/him". Someone who presents as female would be referred to as "she/her". It is really not difficult or unreasonable.
That does not sit comfortably with one of your previous posts:
Stu wrote:
Mon Nov 04, 2019 4:53 pm
[...] children should be taught that from the start. So a child is not a girl just because he wants to be a girl at that time;
There is no such thing as a normal person, only someone you don't know very well yet.

Post Reply