Am I the person I feel I am (black, white, senior citizen, young, or tall person) etc.?
Asked by
flo (
13313
)
May 16th, 2016
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
28 Answers
If you live for years, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, in the role of a black, white, senior, young or tall person then you are that person.
Jazz Jennings knows exactly who she is. She was interviewed by Barbara Walters at age six but she had known exactly what she was since the age of 3
This clip is ONLY 3 MINUTES LONG but a real eye-opener.
.
.
https://youtu.be/cBESQaLyaDo
.
.
I think the simple statement that Jazz made at age 6 sums it up perfectly. “I have a girl brain in a boy body”
Transgender people aren’t doing this on a whim. It’s a lifelong struggle. Check out the statistics on suicide rates among young transgender kids vs. the average.
One parent summed it up perfectly about why she chose to accept her child’s desire to transition “Because I’d rather have a live daughter than a dead son.” Thats what real love and acceptance looks like.
—————————————————————————
However, in fairness, I watched the news clip you posted and I feel that the student in question is being incredibly selfish and short-sighted.
Apparently , the school was willing to accomodate her needs and offered her a private space of her own. SHE REFUSED.
As much as I’m in support of transgender rights, this girl is being extremely pig-headed and harming things in general for other transgender people.
If someone is willing to accommodate you then meet them halfway and accept it if it’s reasonable instead of (literally) making a Federal case out of it.
Any transgender people I’m personally acquainted with (ADULTS) would be thrilled with having a place to take care of their needs in private without being harassed or assaulted.
This girl has little idea how the real world works and is harming the community at large just so she can be stubborn. Foolish.
But, then teenagers are rather well known for being that way. Hopefully they grow out of it.
In the meantime however, she’s doing an incredible amount of damage to the credibility of transgender people everywhere.
Yes and no. If you live as a black woman, and are accepted as one by many people, then I think you are. But, it doesn’t mean there won’t be groups of people who don’t accept that you are black.
It’s just like I tell Jewish people who don’t identify as Jews that there still will always be people who consider them Jewish.
As far as transgender, I’m fine with accepting someone as the gender they identify themselves with, but there will always be people who have to bring up the person was a born a born or born a girl, etcetera.
If someone tells me that they feel like this or that, I just accept it. It is not my business to tell them they are wrong. It does not affect my life significantly in any way and I don’t see where it is anyone else’s business. I don’t understand people who are bothered by these things and I personally judge those people harshly. I believe in the pursuit of happiness as long as it does not infringe on anyone else’s pursuit of happiness. I believe this is fundamental to a more peaceful, productive world.
The problem with Rachel Dolezal isn’t simply that she live or identified as black, but that she lied about her entire life and background. It wasn’t enough that she connected with black culture and worked as an activist for blacks. She claimed that she was born black (most transgenders are at least honest that they were born as the opposite sex they identify with), she claimed to have been born in a hunt, that her family were hunter-gatherers, that she lived in Africa as a child. She also up shit tons of accusations of discrimination and hate crimes against her that did not hold up under scrutiny. In short: she had to out-black, and out-African everybody else. She had to be the most African-American “African-American” in the land.
The problem with Rachel Dolezal
Clearly you were grievously harmed. Yeah, she was reaping all the sweet benefits, power and cash that one gets for being black in America.
Eyeroll
@Call_Me_Jay Since when is personal or grievous harm the standard for whether or not we can disapprove of something? I have never been murdered. Nor has anyone in my family. But surely I can still disapprove of murderers even if they never caused me any grievous harm, yes?
Also, Rachel Dolezal did use her lies to get a job as the president of the Spokane, Washington chapter of the NAACP. It may not be the most powerful or the best paid job in the world, but there’s still money and power there (even if only relative to a particular community—but it was a community she wanted to have status in).
NAACP Statement on Rachel Dolezal
June 12, 2015
Baltimore, MD – For 106 years, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has held a long and proud tradition of receiving support from people of all faiths, races, colors and creeds. NAACP Spokane Washington Branch President Rachel Dolezal is enduring a legal issue with her family, and we respect her privacy in this matter. One’s racial identity is not a qualifying criteria or disqualifying standard for NAACP leadership. The NAACP Alaska-Oregon-Washington State Conference stands behind Ms. Dolezal’s advocacy record. In every corner of this country, the NAACP remains committed to securing political, educational, and economic justice for all people, and we encourage Americans of all stripes to become members and serve as leaders in our organization.
@Call_Me_Jay
Where in the blue fuck did that come from? To go by your reaction there one might think I just personally insulted you.
Let’s say it’s a black person who feels like he/she is white or vice versa (let’s forget Rachel Dolezal).
What could be the reason for not at all referring to the other side’s (no to allowing any biologically male person to use the women’s wahsroom) reason for objecting to it? The video in
@Darth_Algar
It came from the NAACP web site. The highlighted text is a link.
@Call_Me_Jay If the NAACP statement was supposed to be a response to me, then you obviously missed the point of my answer. I suppose that shouldn’t be too surprising, though, seeing as you also misunderstood @Darth_Algar‘s most recent post. He was asking where the anger in this post came from.
…In the video in the detail of my OP (around 3.00 minutes into it), _”...if you tell a 14 yr. old that he can quote unquote “self identify” as a female so that he get in the females’s locker room or washroom ,.....” And, _”...I can never report because they would use that as a cover….”
@flo The problem there is that it is a pernicious myth that one can simply “self-identify” and suddenly become trans or be allowed to use a different bathroom. Getting legal recognition as a trans person takes time and effort. It’s not something that can be done on a whim.
@SavoirFaire You tow
The anger was from you equating Rachel Dolezal to a murderer and @Darth_Algar typing out a spelling- and grammar deficient screed about lying and “she had to out-black, and out-African everybody else”.
The anger towards her is obvious.
But it’s not me you have to convince. You need to go whitesplain it to the NAACP. Make sure they know how wrong they were to make that statement.
@SavoirFaire No one addressed the other side’s point before I brought it up in my previous to last post. How can that be that no one addresses it at all?
According to the Obama’s directive (whatever you call it) the criminals in the womens’ washroom would already have done their deed because it’s not going to be as alerting thing that it currently is.
@Call_Me_Jay
No anger (personally I couldn’t give a shit less about her), simply stating the reasons people took issue with Rachel Dolezal were not simply because she’s white. Judging by your responses perhaps the anger here lies with you.
@flo
NOBODY ADDRESSED YOUR POINT? Are you blind? Just because I didn’t agree with you doesn’t mean I didn’t address it. The kid is being stubborn for no good reason. That does not mean that every transgender should be forced to risk their life going into a men’s bathroom. Period.
Mike Huckabee was using that as an argument as well bt saying that “When I was that age, I would have loved any opportunity to get a peek at the girl’s room. So I would just announce that day, I’m transgender…” or words to that effect. This is silliness and he knows it.
You don’t just become transgender for a day on a whim. It doesn’t work that way. Plus what these commentators have completely lost touch with is the mindset of a typical teenage boy who is busy being macho to prove his manhood. They would rather die than get caught wearing a dress and acting all girly just to be able to sneek a peek. Boys get beat up for that.
That’s why I think it’s a disaster to tell transgender women that they must use the men’s room. The risk is too high for assault or death. Check the statistics.
However, as I said, any transgender friends of mine would be totally thrilled to have a private room where they can pee in peace and nobody knows who or what they are.
When they’re out in public, these are the types of rooms they look for. Single seater sometimes labeled “family” so that clearly anyone can use it in privacy.
THIS student was offered that option and REFUSED. That is just too ridiculous for words and gives those ignorant commentators fuel to add to the fire that “he/she” just wants to be able to sneak a peek.
I don’t think that’s why she turned down the offer of a private room cuz one doesn’t just be transgender for a day. Only she knows why she turned down the privacy option but I think it was a stupid decision which has repercussions for everybody in the Transgender community. Too bad there wasn’t a wise transgender adult to counsel her to just be glad for the offer of privacy and just get on about the business of living your life. There will be much bigger hurdles facing you in adulthood, things like job discrimination. That’s where you make a stand where it counts for something, not which bathroom you use. If someone offers you privacy, thank them and be grateful.
But this kid is literally making a Federal case about it and it’s ridiculous, imho.
@Call_Me_Jay I didn’t equate Rachel Dolezal to a murderer. I used an example (a murderer who had no direct impact on me) to undermine a general principle (one can only find something problematic if they were personally and/or grievously harmed by it) that was implicit in your response to @Darth_Algar. This is called “proof by contradiction.” It is a standard argumentative technique, and it in no way requires the example used for the refutation to be equivalent or even directly comparable to its counterpart in the original argument. In fact, proof by contradiction often uses examples that are much different than their counterparts for the sake of logical clarity.
In any case, I am not angry at Rachel Dolezal. I just think that both sentences of your earlier response have serious logical deficiencies, and it is literally my job to point out logical deficiencies. (It’s not my job to do it on Fluther, of course, but the habit tends to follow me around. Besides, logical deficiencies are logical deficiencies regardless of where they occur.) Furthermore, I have no problem with the NAACP issuing a statement of support for Rachel Dolezal and do not think they were wrong to do so. This is yet another thing you have mistakenly read into my answers.
@flo Note that we have been addressing your title question. But we cannot be expected to guess which parts of the video you want us to address. So if no one addressed this particular point before you brought it up explicitly, then it is only because there was no way to know you wanted it addressed.
@Darth_Algar No anger,
“I couldn’t give a shit less”
“Where in the blue fuck did that come from?”
Yep. Totally calm. Not a sign of anger. Buddha-like serenity. Yep.
@Call_Me_Jay
My speech, like that of a sailor, is peppered with four letter words. It is not, in itself, indicative of any particular emotion. But you have shown clearly that you will read whatever you wish into other people’s posts, regardless of how far removed it is from the author’s intent, so there is no point in further discussion with you.
“My swearing at you isn’t indicative of any emotion.”
OK, Spock. LOL
Of course, that’s how things work today. Declare you’re something, and you magically are, and everyone else is expected to go along with it no questions asked.
@Call_Me_Jay
I didn’t say that I had no emotion. I said that my using the word “fuck” (or any other swear word), in and of itself, was not an indicator of any particular emotion. Again, you’ve shown that you’re just going to read whatever you want into someone else’s posts. And you’re only interested in arguing what you’ve read into it, with no regard whatsoever to the author’s actual intent.
@Buttonstc __“That does not mean that every transgender should be forced to risk their life going into a men’s bathroom”_ Risk their life?? I don’t think even the transgendered are claiming that. That is the worst case senario which is rare, because the transgendered who are loud about it are rare. And esp. in high school.
-I tried to find where the reason for the objection is addressed in your 1st post.
And even in your 2nd post all there is is “Mike Huckabee was using that as an argument as well bt saying that “When I was that age, I would have loved any opportunity to get a peek at the girl’s room. So I would just announce that day, I’m transgender…” or words to that effect. This is silliness and he knows it.” “This is silliness and he knows it” is not an argument is it? Why is it silliness?
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
