Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   light@qoto.org's status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 16:09:58 JST light

   Contrary to popular misconception, critics of the transgender movement do not disagree that trans people have "rights" as a monolith. They're talking about whether trans people have specific rights including:
   - not being misgendered
   - tax-payer funded gender surgery/hormones
   - (specifically children) to get surgery at all without their parents consent (or with)
   I don't definitely disagree with all of the above, but it gives you a sense of the reasonable criticism people can have with the concept of "trans rights" as "allies" actually mean it (not as the basic human rights they claim to mean).
   I do definitely disagree with the right to not be misgendered, as that goes against the right to free speech, which I value a lot.

   Trans rights I definitely agree with:
   - having surgery with their own money as an adult
   - social transition (excluding the bit where they force other people to play along calling them by their preferred pronouns using laws such as the German self-identity law)
   - freedom from violence from bigots

   Human rights are not just a stand-in for "things I like". They actually mean something. Namely, government force applied to protect a property of a human being or group thereof (legal right), or a moral obligation on someone to do or not do something to/for someone (moral right).
   A legal right to not be misgendered means that the government passes laws prohibiting misgendering trans people. Think about that.

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 16:09:57 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to
     free speech doesn't encompass shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater when there is no reason to believe there is an actual fire. because that hurts people, it does actual harm.
     
     misgendering people, whether they're cis or trans, is likely to hurt them. making mistakes illegal usually involves very demanding requirements of negligence, but making willfully hurting others out of spite and prejudice illegal is a lot more reasonable
     
     as for medical and psychological treatments needed by any person to be able to live a happier life, ruling some out just because you don't experience or need them comes across as horribly selfish to me. I hope you never need treatment for a condition that others reject as legitimate, and if you do, that you aren't, like, taking back at another vulnerable group. especially teens and children, who may have to deal with bigotry and intolerance not only in society at large, and in doctors, but also in parents that were supposed to be supportive
     
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 18:23:15 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Yuchen Pei
     which biological reality? that in the gonads that you probably can't see, or that in the brain development that you definitely can't see? that a person has been misgendered since birth because of their mismatched gonads doesn't justify keeping on misgendering them.
     
     and don't get me started on religion. lots of harm have been brought onto humankind by hateful behaviors (pseudo)justified by religion, but religious freedom is also a human right that is also often disregarded, and such beliefs can go pretty deep in a person's identity. hurting them purposefully is also unkind, even if you disagree with them.
     
     CC: @light@qoto.org
     
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 18:23:16 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva
     @lxo
     > misgendering people, whether they're cis or trans, is likely to hurt them.  making mistakes illegal usually involves very demanding requirements of negligence, but making willfully hurting others out of spite and prejudice illegal is a lot more reasonable
     
     Misgendering a trans identified person hurts the same way as denying the existence of God to a believer. Misgendering is not out of spite or prejudice if done on the basis of respecting biological reality. Making it illegal is not just a violation of freedom of speech, but also of freedom of conscience
     @light
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 18:44:24 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Yuchen Pei
     have you really never met hermaphodites or intersex people? I can introduce you to some. it's not binary for sure.
     
     it's not even the case that gonads and brain development are always aligned: there are biological factors that can make them develop differently, and also to be misaligned with genes.
     
     mistaking them for binary and aligned is a hurtful oversimplification.
     
     say, why do you take/accept me as male? you've never seen my genome, you've never looked at my private parts, you've never scanned my brain. at most, you've seen some secondary characteristics that hormones, whether natural or artificial, would bring about. yet you don't hesitate in accepting me as male.
     
     why is it so difficult for you to extend similar kindness to other fellow human beings?
     
     CC: @light@qoto.org
     
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 18:44:26 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva
     @lxo
     Biological reality that human sex is binary and immutable, which has nothing to do with the visibility of gonads or brain development to naked eyes
     @light
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 19:12:26 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • LostInCalifornia
     • Yuchen Pei
     the concern over safety is a misdirection: it's not a reason to misgender people, it's a reason to worry about fraudsters who are also sexual predators. don't conflate such monsters with trans people, that's hateful. I have reasons to believe there are far more victims of sexual attacks out of being forced into unsafe spaces out of their misassigned gender than the case you claim to be worried about.
     
     as for sports fairness, I've already suggested that the solution is not for people to be forced into an imaginary binary, but to have more categories that encompass all human diversity, as done in para-olympics
     
     I'm afraid I don't know what these newly-won rights are that you speak of, so I can't comment on them. care to clue me in?
     
     CC: @quasi@peister.org @light@qoto.org
     
   • Embed this notice
     LostInCalifornia (lostincalifornia@spinster.xyz)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 19:12:27 JST LostInCalifornia

     in reply to

     • Yuchen Pei
     • Alexandre Oliva

     @lxo @quasi @light It doesn't matter how personally painful speech is, SCOTUS ruled if a person is speaking on matters of public concern, it's free speech.

     When one side demands that women abandon all concern over their safety, a chance for fair competition in sports, and access to newly won rights, I think that is a matter of public concern.

     https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-activities/snyder-v-phelps/facts-and-case-summary-snyder-v-phelps

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 20:01:56 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • LostInCalifornia
     • Yuchen Pei
     yeah, I'm picking your rotten, specious arguments and throwing them in the trash where they belong
     
     you're right that there are plenty of men who don't respect women as equally deserving of rights and respect. that's why we ended up living in patriarchies. that's probably why women feel it's safer to go to the bathroom or for walks in groups. that sucks, and needs to be fixed.
     
     but we don't need to make more victims in the process.
     
     CC: @quasi@peister.org @light@qoto.org
     
   • Embed this notice
     LostInCalifornia (lostincalifornia@spinster.xyz)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 20:01:57 JST LostInCalifornia

     in reply to

     • Yuchen Pei
     • Alexandre Oliva

     @lxo @quasi @light And once again, you go for the low lying rotten fruit.

     My understanding is that men do not place women's concerns highly, and consider that their concerns are vastly more important.

     You want to talk about solidarity? Marx spoke about the problems of socialism not considering women's concerns back in the late 1800's. It took until 1974 for women in the US to be able to apply for a credit in their own name, and labor unions were in opposition.

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 20:02:00 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • LostInCalifornia
     • Yuchen Pei
     that's not a trans problem. a cis homosexual person might also harass others in a restroom.
     
     my understanding is that solidarity has historically been a workaround for that. when someone is attacking someone else, that's pretty easy to tell, and for others around to take action and help the victim.
     
     CC: @light@qoto.org @LostInCalifornia@spinster.xyz
     
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 20:02:01 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • LostInCalifornia
     • Alexandre Oliva
     @lxo
     > the concern over safety is a misdirection: it's not a reason to misgender people, it's a reason to worry about fraudsters who are also sexual predators.  don't conflate such monsters with trans people, that's hateful. 
     
     Practically how is a woman supposed to distinguish between someone who is "genuinely trans" and someone who is "fraudulently trans", thus achieving not being hateful in your book?
     @LostInCalifornia @light
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 20:13:05 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Yuchen Pei
     we were talking about gender. that's not reducible to gamete sizes. gametes don't attack vulnerable people, they don't compete in sports, and they don't have rights. we're talking about people here, people who express genders. genders are mostly social constructs, even if they have biological foundations and some correlation with the definition you brought of sex. I'm not going to join you in your change of topics.
     
     CC: @light@qoto.org
     
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 20:13:06 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva
     @lxo
     Sex is (commonly?) defined by gamete size. It sounds like you have a definition using brain development and gonads that is not equivalent to the gamete size definiton.
     
     If sex is not binary, as you said, can you name a third sex?
     
     I assume you are male based on information such as the pronouns used to refer to you and that there's no evidence suggesting you are trans identified. If someone refers to himself as she/her and claims to be trans then I assume he is male too.
     @light
   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 20:57:02 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Yuchen Pei
     I didn't notice you'd changed topics before. the conversation was about transgender rights at first.
     
     yet somehow my response applied: existing hermaphrodites and intersex people don't fit in this fictional binary oversimplification of sex any more than that of gender.
     
     anyhow... I think this conversation has gone as far as it can. anxiety out of the invasion of venezuela is killing me, and I'll go out for a walk instead of imposing this debate on others (sorry).
     
     CC: @light@qoto.org
     
   • Embed this notice
     Yuchen Pei (quasi@peister.org)'s status on Saturday, 03-Jan-2026 20:57:04 JST Yuchen Pei

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva
     @lxo
     > we were talking about gender.  that's not reducible to gamete sizes.
     
     I was talking about sex and I assumed you were too, when you countered my "sex is binary" with "it's not binary" followed by further arguments supporting your claim
     @light
   • Embed this notice
     翠星石 (suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com)'s status on Sunday, 04-Jan-2026 19:39:07 JST 翠星石

     in reply to

     • Alexandre Oliva
     @lxo @light >free speech doesn't encompass shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater
     In the USA, shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater is protected free speech no matter what (as it should be) - you just face the consequences if anything happens (nothing ever happens anymore, as theaters are designed to avoid crowd crushes and people now tend to ignore crying wolf).
     
     It is a terrible idea to let the government get away with making any speech illegal, ever, even if you are opposed to such speech - as the government can and will exploit that weapon against you on a whim (for example, they'll gleefully take the chance to go look back over everything you've ever said until they find illegal speech and then put you in prison for years to life for such bad speech).
     
     It is not reasonable to make even hurting others feelings out of spite and prejudice illegal, as the cure to spite and prejudice is more speech - not arrests and censorship.
     
     Many people absolutely hate my guts for daring to like freedom and community and do their absolute best to try to hurt my feelings (but they do not win, as I do not stoop to their level by attempting censorship) and would love nothing more for speech that points out that free software even exists (after all, it hurts the feelings of corpo suits badly) - it is highly important that such people do not end up with such power! (some of them already partially do - there are some microsoft businesses that have a contract+NDA that states that mentioning that free software even exists to business customers is forbidden).