Edit for context:
My view is transracial isn’t valid and this person is trying to dogwhistle. I’ve already blocked this person, and now they’re going after my friend saying my friend is transphobic because they disagreed with them about transracial being a thing (they’re purposefully leaving the context out so my friend looks transphobic when what my friend really said was transgender is valid but transracial isn’t)
This thread clearly shows that people are naturally bigoted. There is trace community on reddit. There are a lot of trace people who are also trans. They have dysphoria. They are suicidal. The hate their body. They are not accepted by society. They get death threats. Arguments used against trace people are the same as arguments against trans people. So, we are actually the same.
“Shut up.”
If you’re actually being sincere, you might want to ask people how to articulate your view, you’d have to let them know what your view is though. Or ask for peoples opinion on the question.
My view is transracial isn’t valid and this person is trying to dogwhistle. I’ve already blocked this person, and now they’re going after my friend saying my friend is transphobic because they disagreed with them about transracial being a thing.
Block them.
I’m confused. Wouldn’t transracial just be “mixed”? Like one parent is white, one parent is black.
Mixed baby.
Never heard someone refer to it as “transracial”.
Transracial in this context is people identifying as different races, like Rachel Dolezal
Never heard of that name before, so I googled it. Holy shit. Guys, if you haven’t heard of Rachel Dolezal, google it. It is a WILD read.
It reminds me of this local wrestling character. “Malcolm Farrakhan”. A combination of the names Malcolm X and Louis Farrakhan. Played by a 90lbs 5’2 white guy, who surrounded himself with a group of big muscular black guys. One of which you might remember from WWE in The Nexus as “Micheal Tarver”.
Well, Malcolm Farrakhan was as white as could be, which was the whole joke. He didn’t do blackface (thank god), but his whole schtick was screaming “I AM A VERY LIGHT SHADE OF BLACK!!! I HAVE BLACK HERRITAGE!!!” meanwhile the crowd laughs at the absurdity, as a group of 4-5 black guys all act like they fully believe him.
Wrestling is weird, and not meant to be taken seriously.
But this Rachel Dolezal essentially did the exact same thing a decade later, except in real life. Just less cartoonish about it.
Which is pretty fucked up.
They don’t appear to understand the difference between cultural and gender identity. I’d try this:
“If a white person of european descent were raised from birth by a Sentinel Island tribe, would they be culturally european?”
The answer is obviously no, illustrating that the cultural identity of a person depends on the culture the person was raised in. I don’t know how gender identity works, but clearly how someone is raised has little to do with it.
Edit: Disclaimer that I have absolutely no idea what I am talking about.Problem is that “race” isn’t just cultural. How you will be treated definitely depends on how other people perceive your “race” and subsequently it will shape your life reality.
That person you gave as an example? In the US, Canada or most European countries he will be treated better than an actual Citizen born and raised in the respective country who is perceived as “black” or “brown”.
Problem is that “race” isn’t just cultural. How you will be treated definitely depends on how other people perceive your “race” and subsequently it will shape your life reality
But surely how you will be treated definitely depends on how other people perceive your “gender” and subsequently it will shape your life reality?
Everything you described up there sounds exactly like “cultural.”
That makes gender more like “ethnicity”/“race” rather than “culture” don’t you think?
I’m advised that there is no scientific or genetic basis for race. I’m a little unclear on how “ethnicity” is different from “race.”
All of them seem to be social constructs.
social construct isn’t a synonym for “doesn’t exist”. just because scientific racism is illogical it doesn’t mean that white people don’t behave as if we’re superior to others, whether consciously or not. you can’t say racism is ethnic oppression because even comparing between white Latino and Black Latino there’s a statistical difference in police brutality based on anti-Blackness
culture and ethnicity have nothing to do with race. race is based on perceived phenotype
I’d say that a lot of race is based upon shared experiences with other members of the group, and being seen as part of the group. Many people from the Middle East and North Africa see themselves as white. A lot of white Americans and Europeans disagree. I would say that being perceived as a member of an in group is more important than actual color. For example, some lighter skinned African-Americans were able to be perceived as white, thus being treated significantly better. Were they black? Of course they were. They made a conscious decision to pick which experiences and culture they wanted. But they definitely had experiences where they didn’t pass, and had experiences according to their given race.
what you’re talking about is proximity to whiteness. AFAIK passing was not a choice which makes Dolezal’s actions even more violent. lighter Black people benefit from colorism but they’re still at risk of lynching because of their race. white people doing blackface is a way to mock that powerlessness felt by victims of white supremacy and make money from clout.
as for non-white SWANA people assimilating into whiteness, that’s a way to harness the colonial power structure to their own benefit by distancing themselves from Black people. this is all a trauma response and survival mechanism from centuries of European genocide like colored South Africans with the same phenotype as indigenous Africans claiming they’re not Black.
Does it really matter if someone is either
I’d respond, “Rachel Dolezal was never shot by the police” and “Michael Jackson did not become an honorary white person just because he tried to be one.”
ironically the assumption that Michael was trying to become white is both racist and ableist. he was suffering from vitiligo which led him to use skin-lightening prescription creams to cover up the uneven blotches of color caused by the disability.
And the wigs? Vitiligo means uneven splotches. He was fully white from head to toe from bleaching.
does a Black person wearing a wig or straightening their hair make them white? i don’t understand this asinine question.
Vitiligo is a disability that causes ostracization so he tried hiding it. there’s this thing called universal vitiligo which can progress to your entire skin. maybe do a bit of research next time before casting judgment?
And the rhinoplasty?
He wanted Latoya’s nose
I prefer elephantoplasty…
Just don’t have conversation about this stuff at all. You can rarely change a person’s mind.
I used to try talking about politics and things in my rural town but it’s pointless. In America it’s more like a drug people use, they like the rush they get from the drama. And most the time no one is saying anything original, it’s like they just spout off market sound bites. The conversation will always go nowhere.
It might sound counter productive to not fight for something like that. But just live your life, and understand life and humanity is chaos, to try to change people is like trying turn the sun into an icecube. You can’t fuck with the universe.
Not wasting time on that stuff and being the best person you can be and being a good role model to your immediate circle is worth more to the community and will spread naturally without trying.
No race, no gender. No problems.
Gender anarchism and race anarchism. People be just people. Social constructs shall not be a dividing reason, let everyone behave however the hell they want as long as they don’t hurt others and be happy.
Also US race concepts are kind of weird in general. I suppose the history of slavery and segregation did a number on people’s perception of race.
Literally the only rational answer. Stop giving a fuck about what people look like unless you’re explicitly looking for someone to fuck
This is exactly why I think “transgender” does more harm than good and I’ll die on this hill. What’s the point? The people who are going to accept the way you express yourself aren’t going to care if it conforms to gender stereotypes, and the people who aren’t won’t suddenly change their minds if it does.
All it does is reinforce the very same stereotypes that gave you gender dysphoria in the first place. It’s saying that gender norms are valid, you just got assigned the wrong ones. Live your truth, express yourself how you want, alter your body however you want, but don’t validate oppressive stereotypes in the process.
This reeks of, “I don’t see color,” which is bullshit racists say to justify ignoring the plights of people of color in the US.
We need to see color if we ever want to possibly attempt to correct the deep, systemic problems we have with racism.
Also US race concepts are kind of weird in general. I suppose the history of slavery and segregation did a number on people’s perception of race.
There is no “did” here, it’s ongoing.
I get your point, but you’re missing the point of what the person is saying. They said that if no one cared about gender or race transgenders or transrace wouldn’t be an issue, it would be seen similarly to people who dye their hair or undergo plastic surgery to change something they don’t like on themselves, i.e. cosmetic changes that society in general doesn’t give a crap.
If society treated race the same way we treat shoe sizes, i.e. they exist, we recognize them when it’s needed but understand that outside of picking a shoe you don’t care about it (there are no toilets for people who use size 6, or a special door that only people with size 7, and people certainly don’t require your shoe size in your CV and use that as a decision point as to whether they will hire you). IF we could get everyone to think like this, then we wouldn’t need to worry about the plights of any group because they would be in the past. That being said, this is not realistic because people are habit creatures, and if you grew up being taught to be racist and are never confronted about it you will keep those beliefs, that’s why it’s important to break stereotypes, that’s why affirmative actions are important, not because it helps the individual break through a societal barrier (although that’s important as well) but because they help society break from the preconceived notions that have engrained in most people’s minds through centuries of oppression.
The ideal future is one where gender or race doesn’t matter, but the road there goes through recognizing the plights that each gender and race has to face and adjust society to compensate for them so they can live “similar” lives and that on the long run society walks towards a more diverse and inclusive group. It’s easy to have a prejudice against someone different from your “normal”, which is why it’s important to break “normal” views and extremely important to normalize taboo behavior.
This is absurd talk. I don’t want people generalizing me for my race or gender, and I wouldnt do it to someone else either.
You must go around treating every minority as if they are a victim of something. I’m sure they greatly appreciate your refusal to see them as an individual.
This race/gender anarchism would help trans people as the general public would stop giving a shit how people choose to behave and what they are interested in.
It’s nonsense because race is a social construct.
But so it’s gender, so this isn’t really a good argument is it?
white people, we learn one sociological term and run it into the ground. it doesn’t mean what you think it does.
“A social construct is an idea, category, or framework that gains meaning through collective agreement within a society”
The racial lines of division are arbitrary and different in each society. Therefore, a social construct.
Remember, it wasn’t THAT long ago that Italians weren’t considered white. Now they are.
I’m no expert on either topic. But I believe humans basically start off as female in the womb, and either become male or don’t. And there are many intersex conditions. The body responds to hormones typically associated with either sex. So gender is fluid in a biological sense. If someone transitions to male, female or nonbinary, they already kind of contained that potential.
However, race is a social construct, usually based on heritage as well as biological appearance. So it’s hard to say how much biology is really involved. Does the human body contain the ability to be any race? Or to cultivate an appearance that prompts other humans to socially categorize you as one race or the other?
Maybe for people who are mixed race, there is a sort of spectrum available to them. They likely know how to present themselves in a way that gets them categorized as one race or the other.
But otherwise, not really. If you’re White, and you say, “I identify as Black,” the question might be: do you have Black heritage? If you don’t, you can’t really create it out of thin air. There wasn’t a situation while you were in the womb where various hormones could have influenced you to appear more Black than you do. If your parents are both White, they were going to have a White baby, no matter what. Race is a social construct, but it’s based on appearance and heritage. It’s about belonging to a group, not about being an individual, the way gender is.
If you’re assigned female at birth, and you say, “I identify as male,” then cool! Your body already has the capability to become hormonally male. You can socially identify as male. Any human, of any race, has this potential. Any two parents could have a baby that is any sex or gender, depending on various factors.
I’m uncomfortable with the idea that the only reason that being trans is valid is because of biological factors.
If we could construct a human that came into existence without being Female at some gestational point, you gonna tell them they can’t be trans? If someone has a thyroid problem such that they their body CAN’T handle a sex hormone, you gonna tell them they can’t be trans?
I feel like we’re looking for a 9-D chess play when a 1-D play is sufficient: you say you’re trans, you’re trans. I’m not the fucking cops
Good points, and I think we generally agree. I definitely didn’t mean to exclude anyone in those real or hypothetical situations you mentioned. To me, those examples are more about showing how gender is, or can be, biologically fluid. There are many “odd” situations that aren’t binary. So amongst the many unusual ways that sex can occur biologically, “male brain in a female body” or “I reject the concept of gender entirely” are valid and believable.
I agree with your last point as well, but in the context of this post, would you tell Rachel Dolezal that she says she’s Black, so she’s Black? I guess I was trying to find some sort of difference between gender and race identity, the way the question was posed.
I’m definitely not claiming to have an unassailable argument, so thanks for responding with good points.
They’re either trying to get your goat, or it’s genuine. Either way, it’s not making the world any better by bestowing upon yourself the title of judge and enforcer. You’re either taking bait or you’re a fucking cop. “Ok” is all you gotta say.
So, as a white person, I cannot pass as black, so I can never expect people to treat me like I’m black?
Don’t get me wrong, I think the idea is silly, but all the arguments I’ve seen in this thread are a word-swap away from being a bad argument against transgender people.
What’s the essential difference?
Assuming race, As a white person you are going to struggle to get others to see you as black. Cause those are social constructs. YOU do not get to decide what others see you as when it comes to a social construct. Because the very point of a social construct is that it’s the general social frame work used to see others as.
Ethnicity on the other hand, as a white skin tone person if you grew up in Africa in a tribe of indigenous people then you would be an indigenous person. Ethnicity only cares about the facts.
To mirror that to transgender.
Gender is a social construct, it’s what others see you as and how you categorize into a given communities framework. This differs between communities. For example what defines a male gender in ancient Rome is different then ancient Scotland. Both having male genders that quite literally just do not exist in one or the other.
While sex is the physical only caring about the factual biological. The actual flesh and reproductive organs. You either have them, or you don’t. Primary or secondary. You can alter them with modern medicine sure, but even after alteration. It still only matters what you have. Are you a male producer or female reproducer. Are you functional or not. Do you have both sets? That’s basically it, sex just cares about the facts it’s not socially constructed. You can’t argue that someone with a penis does not have a penis.
Ethnicity tho, doesn’t have a modern medicine equivalent. It just is what it is. You can’t change facts, so your rather stuck with it. Unlike a penis.
Some of this makes a bit of sense, but it still leans heavily on perception by others, rather than respecting what people know about themselves. This does not seem to be what many transgender persons want.
I’ll think about it.
how is this even close to be about transgender/phobia, were talking about white people trying to pretend to be another race, because they have have x amount of checks on the checklist. race doesnt = gender.
maybe stop comparing race and gender then. trans women only pass because we’re women. you can’t pass as Black because if you told someone you’re Black they’d think you’re a dipshit. you can’t pass as something you’re not.
maybe stop comparing race and gender then.
Isn’t the entire premise of the post that someone is seeing parallels here, and would like to understand why the similarities are not meaningful? As I said, I agree that transracial people are being silly, but I haven’t seen an argument here that can’t be used against transgender people.
trans women only pass because we’re women.
But there are plenty of transwomen who don’t “pass” despite being women. But they should still be treated as women. Hell, there have been at least a few reports of ciswomen who couldn’t pass as women, at least to sufficiently assholish observers. On that basis, I don’t think we can use “passing” as a factor to determine people’s identity.
race doesn’t work that way though, does it? it’s impossible for Black people to not pass as Black because it’s been proven they experience racism based on an immutable characteristic.
gender identity isn’t based on appearance, race is strictly appearance based. the fact you’re bringing self-identification into this makes it sound like you’re arguing in bad faith and trying to diminish Black people’s experiences.
PS: using ciswomen and transwomen makes you sound like a TERF.
using ciswomen and transwomen makes you sound like a TERF.
What would be a correct way to distinguish between the two?
-
“Woman” seems like it works refer to both, to be used in the majority of cases when the distinction is irrelevant.
-
I don’t want to say “natural” women, or “real” women, as even someone as thick as me can see that’s insulting.
-
It seems that using the prefix for both makes them equal.
What do you think world be more appropriate?
it’s impossible for Black people to not pass as Black because it’s been proven they experience racism based on an immutable characteristic.
But they would suggest that as soon as we discover a way to change that characteristic, transrace world be valid.
Further, while gender identity may not be based on appearance, the way one is treated is very much based on appearance. If I look male, I get treated as male. If I look female, I get treated as female. If I look like one, but insist I am the other, people tend to have disagreements between their deliberate and automatic behaviors. (Well, the same people do, anyway.)
I can’t think of a good way to prove it, but I am legitimately curious about this topic. I’m never happy with the answer “because this one is right, and that one is wrong.” There needs to be reasons why.
-
The best way to respond is to disregard them, block and move on. Transracial is an actual thing, but it refers to people of one race adopted by another. Transracial ala Dolezal is just a troll to attack trans people, no different from attack helicopters.
Don’t even know if I’d call that transracial, that’s just a person who is of one ethnicity but was raised in a different culture than one might expect for someone who looks like them. There’s no “transitioning” happening there.
It’s not even a race, it’s usually a community with a different culture, so the entire term is invalid. And humans are one species with no races, despite this we keep the divisions that the less educated from history created.
transracial adoption doesn’t imply that the child’s race is being changed but that the adopting family is of a different race than them. it’s usually meant to highlight the way white parents adopt Black children to be used as slave labor.
we keep the divisions
who’s we? this is dangerous and is implying that the only reason racism keeps being an issue is because Black people refuse to move on. only we as whites have the privilege to ignore the racial caste system and pretend like nothing is going on
I genuinely don’t know enough about what people who claim to be trans racial are even saying and why they’re saying it to form an opinion on it. My gut feeling is that it isn’t valid and they’re bad actors, but my gut has been wrong before.
So if someone told me “trans racial is just as valid as trans gender” I’d either not respond or just say “I don’t know about that.” and leave it at that.
Gentle reminder that if you believe someone is a bad actor and using dog whistles there isn’t a point in responding to things like this because you aren’t going to change their mind.
Don’t engage with them.
