The person who is ridiculed because they are different, disowned from their families because they can’t meet the demands of pretending to be someone they are not, denied the social accommodation that makes their lives comfortable, refused housing because of how they look, denied the health care that helps them feel centered because it creeps out the people who do not have their condition… How can their mind be still?

Trans health is dependent on the people around us the same way your health is dependent on the people around you. Trans joy is as possible as trans suffering. The difference is in other people allowing it to happen.

This is career advice, not anti-intellectualism. With the rising cost of schools that leave so many in debt bondage University has risks. If you pick a field of study that you find rewarding but the jobs associated crush your soul or if there is no job then you end up in fantastic amounts of debt that unlike other debt cannot be forgiven. A lot of education via a university route is padded or inflated with requirements for the degree that do not add to one’s meaningful body of knowledge but exist to line the pockets of the institutions.

None of this is to say that one shouldn’t pursue knowledge, university is not the only route toward intellectualism. Being in trades does not stop one from learning from other resources. Autodiadactism is on the rise. What people are against is a predatory system of for profit post secondary education.

Misogyny, homophobia, transphobia and other forms of bigotry are also not inherent in blue collar positions by default. It more depends on your geographical location and crew in either situation because the more culturally normal it is in a given city to be queer or how many women are hired in a work place change those workplaces. As a trans person I have worked a number of blue collar jobs that compared to trans friends of mine in whitecollar positions have been more universally accepting of my identity. A number of my co-workers in those construction jobs are also damn near always in classes of some variety, sometimes in accredited institutions but not always. We are all in situations where the job market and personal survival pushes us to the practicality of going where the money is for work but not allowing ourselves to be entirely defined by our jobs. Sometimes the blue collar positions are very meaningful. They are often tied in to incredibly basic facets of quality of life, helping people be properly sheltered, hygenic and comfortable or improving communities through infrastructure.

Your post in some ways comes across as a bit elitist as though white collar positions demanding high levels of acreditied education are more valid than blue collar ones. We should be looking to support blue collar positions as not failure states and provide safety nets for the physical strain of those positions while offering workers chances to obtain education for education sake at reasonable cost to allow them career flexibility and personal enrichment while critiquing systems that place so great a financial burden on students.

If you are unhappy here I assure you there are others to choose from. However I have no particular desire to delve on someone else’s behalf particularly since when so many say “freedom of speech” the term so often boils down to just wanting to say slurs or phobic commentary. Either this place is good enough to use with the design of etiquette the people who came before you set or it’s worth accepting the inconvenience of moving on and finding something better on your own.

I wish you luck in your hunt.

See I don’t think the “tribe” is the trouble when one is given the option and space to choose or abandon their tribes freely with no cost. If this particular culture isn’t your jam there’s plenty of others that do similar that might be to your taste.

Applying the trauma of racism, religious persecution and so on to a digital place that is one of many… Doesn’t feel genuine. I have a lot of feelings about places becoming toxic through allowing racist/phobic stuff to thrive but it’s not like the people booted from spaces who hold those views are shut out in the absolute cold. There are spaces where their veiws and comfort is centered it just doesn’t nessisarily overlap with where I am.

Saying we must accept absolutely everything because “tribes are bad” seems to apply some axiomatic principle to the lowest of low stakes social clubs. The Internet is a string of endless bars next to each other, if you don’t like what one place is serving there’s another one down the road.

On the topic of echo chambers - At what point did we decide that a bunch of people over a wide geographical area with similar interests and a common code of standards/preferences of civility… Is a bad thing?

It’s kind of how social clubs exist irl.

Eh, I have seen enough of what happens to places that favour so called “freedom of speech” or no moderation over valuing comfort of vulnerable users. There’s plenty of places that exist that have “freedom of speech”. Rather than making this place just like those places why not just go to a pre-existing one or start your own?

This is a very America centric veiw and even if it is a steel man it deserves a counterpoint.

After WWII most of the nations who were old empire builders were decimated. The general feeling was even those on the winning side didn’t feel like they’d won. The rebuilding was slow and economic austerity lasted for decades.

The American prosperity of the 1950’s and 60’s wasn’t “normal”. America didn’t have international competition it otherwise would have and that power gave them bargaining rights which made them both culturally dominant as they projected a sense of prosperity and politically powerful due to the resources at their disposal. Opposition to America was potentially disastrous and America threw their weight around like crazy. They expanded their military with these resources and established bases in countries too weak to oppose them.

America came out of the war with something of a Big Damn Hero complex. Communism, for all it’s perceived threat was also a handy excuse to pursue expansion and in keeping American supremacy in place. Whether countries wantes to be “protected” or not really has a lot of across the board nuance. A lot of American political will was coercive and a lot of the things done in the fight for “democracy” were disproportionate and horrific.

Really a lot of the American supremacy at bottom was might makes right. With the world finally recovering economically and now able to speak as equals the US is using measures that demand a return to that economic supremacy and stranglehold. The larger sore points are growing. The world doesn’t need one big power in charge. They don’t need a king with a standing army. They want to make their own choices and have freedoms to not conform to whatever America wants and the attitudes Americans show to disregard that will is garnering response.

Trans people just need to be loved and accepted like everyone else but unfortunately a lot of people really suck.

Point of order. Trans people do not just need to be loved and accepted. Sometimes when this discussion point comes up it’s under the context that if everyone was playing ball with pronouns and being nice then medical transition would be unnecessary. That is not the case.

While it’s true that one of the effects of medical transition means that strangers are more likely to read and not misgender you - being trans the feedback system isn’t dependent on outside observers. What a lot of people seem to think is that gender as understood by cis people, as a largely performative construct, is by and large not how trans people interact with gender.

I personally wish we would stop looking at trans healthcare from the sour perspective of needing to justify itself being a worthy endeavor or not strictly on the basis of suicide rates as though if something is not provably strictly lifesaving in every case it isn’t worthy.

So here’s where the whole “but kids shouldn’t make these decisions” arguement kind of falls apart… You are assuming it’s the kids making the decisions.

The reality here is there is a bar that trans kids need to pass to be eligible which requires the signoff of a whole panel of adults based on the observed behaviour, self descriptive process and recorded outcomes of thousands of trans people in the past creating a rubric that professionals draw on. Being trans and the way gender is processed by trans people is actually more different from being cis than a lot of cis people are aware and the presentations of transness are actually pretty consistent. The regret rate is astronomically low - kind of to the point where it is actually unusual because of the level of care taken to predict and assess potential harm.

To get puberty blockers you need first a child who wants them, then all guardians of the child to agree it is worth pursuing. Then you require the endorsement of a psychiatrist with years of consultation and a social worker to make sure the home situation is above board and nobody is being coerced. Then you need a pediatrician to sign off on the standing health of the paitent, and endocrinologist to assess the safety of pursuing blockers…

It’s not a one time thing either, you have to have routine check ins once things start and if any of these adults remove their endorsement of the paitent then it doesn’t matter what the kid wants. It’s not happening.

If anything medical starts going wrong long term health remains priority.

So can we please not pretend it’s dumb children showing up to a tattoo parlor? It’s a panel of professionals working off predictions based off of a nigh century of diagnostic data in conjunction with parents making informed decisions on behalf of their incredibly dedicated child- because these kids need to self advocate like fucking crazy at all points of the process… Which in itself tends to disqualify kids who don’t absolutely need this because it’s a job and a half.

This is designed as ironclad ethical assisted decision-making as can be made and people are being tricked into thinking that somehow this process is not as rigorously checked for flaws or deals with consent of minors differently than any other form of pediatric medicine. Why is that?

Statement wise “I don’t want the government to tell me what to eat” or variations could mean basically anything. Most of the time it’s posturing on behalf of the idea that a lack of government regulation is a good thing which ignores a rather bloody history of food suppliers adulterating food with harmful substances in the name of preservation / cheapening production cost or using production practices that cause the likelihood of contamination of food.

Once you scratch the surface of the argument you can usually figure out more exactly what they mean and it often isn’t things like government subsidy programs publishing food pyramids based on shady science and economics rather than in the interest of health.

Often it’s based out of perceived personal inconvenience or the appearance of moral judgement such as when there’s some sort of health labelling initiative.

In Canada there are a lot of things that are not considered legal additives for food that are used in the US and the difference in strictness is in part because the Health care system in Canada is funded publicly. Producers of foodstuffs cost the government money directly if whatever they put in it has no nutritional value and causes known health problems. Rather than let companies create messes and tragedies which the government is on the hook to clean up when people’s health fails they remove the issue at it’s source. In the US there’s less incentive as these costs become scattered in the form of individual medical bills and oftentimes the savings are from food being shelf stable for longer. Shrugging one’s shoulders at the fallout or claiming its an exercise of “freedom” is in service to those who make money hand over fist.

Hey, Non-binary trans masc person in trades here.

I can tell you how I perceive different types of co-worker if it helps you want to dial in what it’s like on the other side of the experience. There’s layers to the whole situation and as non-binary folks we understand what we are asking for isn’t automatically going to click and requires people to figure us out.

First up : Most of us end of day aren’t going to rock the boat for anything less than fully agregious behaviour so calls to report other people for being mildly offensive are probably not actually going to go anywhere. Most of us are scared of being labelled “a problem” so we just take the hits when they come. If you are a boss and notice a non-binary person sticking closer to specific people and avoiding others there’s a good chance that they’ve found the people who are safe and avoiding ones who aren’t. A great accommodation that can invisibly help is just to recognize this strata and if a task nessesitates putting people together try and pair along these lines. A lot of co-workers wait until other people aren’t around to let their nastier behaviour shine.

Now to co-worker types. Aside from the full on transphobe or problem persons there’s a range of different stages of cool people.

The “I don’t really get it” Co-worker pays lip service to the polite aspects of using pronouns. They are the type to introduce you to others by misgendering you and then flap their hands and go “Oh no sorry ‘they’”. We know they don’t get it or don’t really care. The misgendering still hurts but they are fairly benign. They make these accidents non maliciously and are afforded grace. If they step in it we basically disregard because they aren’t really worth the effort of getting too comfortable around. We make these accommodations for strangers daily. Annoying but nessisary.

The “in training” co-worker is one whom is encountering their very first trans person. They want you to be their Obi wan and their enthusiasm is a bit of a double edged sword at times. It’s tiring to teach people to dance when they keep stepping on your feet but the job needs doing. Some of us veiw this as our own brand of service to the cause of normalizing ourselves more widely. Some of us just don’t want to be bothered. Either way, just wanting to learn is heaps better than ambivalence. If you fuck up something, don’t make a big deal about it. It’s not that you’re a terrible person and should have known better. Our stuff takes practice and we know it’s not intuitive.

The “A little too up in our shit” co-worker is excited to know the real you but looks at you as a beautiful creature in need of preservation. They might seek to advocate on your behalf or behind your back but the attempt is clumsy and often at odds with a non-binary person’s desire to just get through the workday as a regular human and not make waves. Good enthusiasm sure, we’re probably friends but for the love of God we’re adults and we can sort out our own shit if need be.

The “Understands the Assignment” co-worker is just comfortable to be around. They don’t have to be the most tuned in to all the nuance about our specific needs in ways we require more out of partners, family and friends but they treat our basic requirements as no big deal, maybe they occasionally ask questions to check in if they catch us struggling or reacting but aren’t going to narc to the boss on our behalf. They either avoid all stereotypes associated with sex or in the case of trans mascs/trans femmes they treat us like one of the boys/girls. Gold standard.

Hey, enby here. While I definitely benefit from they being a default I have enough binary trans friends who have this experience. What the person you are replying to is giving you is something referred to as nuance. A solve put forward by a well meaning cis person doesn’t automatically work just because it seems like it should to you. Sometimes it causes new problems and when someone tells you about them it’s a good idea to not assume it’s them trying to be a dick or difficult about something but actually explaining why that solve isn’t always a good thing.

If your intention is to make a trans person actually comfortable instead of getting defensive then listening when these things come up instead of telling them they are trying to be trouble on purpose is the play.

Not everything works for every trans person and inside the trans community there is something sometimes referred to as “the coward’s they”. It’s a well known phenomenon where a physical transition gets to a certain point the brain stops easily registering and sorting someone as being their birth sex because they seemlessly look and act as their gender so the automatic neurological system of assigning them a sex value flips fully to the new and desired setting. You see it on conservative media sometimes where they slip up and use the actual correct pronouns and have to correct themselves back over to using the wrong pronouns… Problem being is it causes the same mental redirect issues for a Conservative actively dodging the automatic reaction as learning to use Non-binary pronouns so as a compromise these people use “they” instead because it is easier to trick the sorter and strand themselves in the safe neutral ground where they can identify a person as “not actually a woman/man” without triggering their audience by using correct pronouns for a trans person.

When you use they/them pronouns for a binary trans person it’s interpreted by the brain of the trans person as you seeing and reacting to all the aspects of their body that makes them visibly trans and your brain’s automatic sex recognition system sorting them into this “not enough” category. It’s effectively less hurtful than full misgendering… But it still pings the bit of the brain that is seeing their own body through your perception via your words. It causes they same dysphoric reaction where their mind picks over all the parts of their body that would cause you to react by misgendering or degendering them. The whole point of preferred pronouns is to help us stop that mental reaction from happening as much.

It is perfectly safe to use they/them pronouns for cis people who do not have dysphoric reactions at all and for non-binary people who actively use those pronouns but if someone rocks up looking like they are trying to project a full binary situation it’s worth going for the full binary pronoun option because they are specifically putting in the work to be as obvious as possible so that people know that’s what they want.

Very individualized as per need. Non-binary is an umbrella term for a whole bunch of different situations so what feels right is going to be very different for someone who feels like say a mix of masculine and feminine versus someone who has dysphoric reactions to any and all gender markers. It’s going to be different for someone whose identity is more static than say someone who fluidly bounces between extremes.

If you know someone who is non-binary that’s essentially just the tip of the iceberg of a whole discussion about how they personally interact with their body or the culture of gender. A lot of people seem to treat it as a full stop third category which can actually be a disservice to a non-binary person because it oftentimes just leads to a lot of new assumptions and frames out some of the ways they could be better treated than just as automatically genderless. I’ve heard of mixes of Mom/Dad for bigender people, just Mom or Dad for trans masc/femme folk, Completely new words that do not have cultural baggage, or just “my parent”. It’s not a one size fits all situation.

I’ve heard “Mawpaw” for a bigender person before which sounds kind of delightfully southern.

“Biological (insert gender here)” serves as a dogwhistle for a lot of organizations that actively push trans bigotry. It gives a fake impression of a scientific take on sex that really hasn’t been embraced by the scientific community for about 50 years at this point.

They aren’t telling you what to think here, they are alerting you to a tool that organized bigotry is using and giving potential tools to subvert it. Once you see “Biological man/woman” for what it actually is (non-scientfic false categorization) it really can’t be unseen.

Also - Can we stop with the calls that people are trying to control what people think? It’s pretty lame. There’s nothing about this interaction that is trying to force you. All that’s happening is you’ve denied that a certain school of thought is valid. You have stated your reasons why you think it’s invalid and now people who have taken upthat school of thought are defending their position. That’s just normal discourse.

Give you a hint. When people tell you “they are trying to control what people think” that’s actually doing more to control people - because it’s asking someone to take it on someone else’s faith that there’s nothing to be listened to rather than engaging with the arguement yourself.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod