Should Bernie Sanders put "he/him" in his Twitter bio?

[Sestak]

WHO CARES

[Ilhan Apologist]

WHO CARES

Glad to have an adult in the room.

[Sestak]

WHO CARES

Glad to have an adult in the room.

I’m not saying that I dislike people putting it in their bios. But aren’t there far more substantive ways to show support or solidarity with the trans community than doing this? And hasn’t Sanders shown he’s a strong trans ally many times over already?

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

[Ilhan Apologist]

WHO CARES

Glad to have an adult in the room.

I’m not saying that I dislike people putting it in their bios. But aren’t there far more substantive ways to show support or solidarity with the trans community than doing this? And hasn’t Sanders shown he’s a strong trans ally many times over already?

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

I mean...I think it's a considerate thing to do, and nothing more. Which is why I despise threads like these.

[John Dule]

You truly live in a bubble if you don't see anything wrong with what you just posted. I said nothing to 'dehumanize' transgenders; I simply questioned whether it is right to encourage someone suffering from mental distress to make life-altering decisions with their body. You are an emotional hypochondriac. Respond to something I actually said or don't bother engaging in this conversation any longer.

The problem here is that your "simple question" is based on not even one, but several simultaneous false pretenses. You're either knowingly being disingenuous, or you're intentionally ignoring facts so you can make sweeping claims about other people's lives based on nothing other than your feelings. The problem is, however, that facts don't care about your feelings.

1. your question ignores the fact that the "life-altering decisions" are the scientifically proven cure for the "mental distress" you're talking about. Even if you insist on framing it in terms of a mental illness, it's cartoonishly evil to claim that the presence of the 'condition' disqualifies someone from the treatment for that condition.

"Oh, your gender isn't the one you were assigned at birth? sorry but that means you have MENTAL DISTRESS and we can't do anything to help you. Sorry but we can only give you medical assistance for gender reassignment if you are perfectly comfortable with the gender you've always been assigned! Too bad, sucks for you! If only you didn't want to change your gender, then we could totally change your gender!" - literally how you think doctors work

Great, so then in the interest of being philosophically consistent, you should endorse assisted suicide for people suffering from depression. After all, suicide is a scientifically proven cure for the mental distress that person is suffering from (and all other mental distress, additionally). It may be a life-altering decision, but what's the alternative? "If only you didn't want to commit suicide, then we could totally let you commit suicide?"

You have to understand, I'm just looking for some degree of consistency here.

2. you seem to be operating under some sort of bizarre assumption that doctors are literally chomping at the bit to perform reassignment surgeries at every possible opportunity. That couldn't be further from the truth at all. I have friends who have transitioned, both trans-men and trans-women, and the amount of hoops they are required to jump through is frankly insane. You have to see a specialist doctor repeatedly over the course of a year (sometimes longer), regularly verifying for them that your dysphoria is consistent over a long period of time, that it significantly impacts your quality of life, and that it's not manageable by any other means. But wait, there's more! That's what is required just to be prescribed transgender hormone therapy which provides only a slow and gradual change, takes years to fully achieve the desired results, and is up to a certain point entirely reversible. And as far as I know there are absolutely no surgeons out there willing to even give an initial consultation for gender reassignment surgery to someone who hasn't been on those hormones consistently for years.

I was referring to the support that internet """activists""" give to transgender people, not the doctors. I do not think it's healthy to continually tell someone that their disorder is society's fault, and that the rest of the world will have to conform to their new identity. I do not think it's helpful to anyone, as OP said, for people to state their pronouns at the beginning of a conversation even to show "allyship." I do not think it's a positive thing when prolonged accusations of "transphobia" lead major medical institutions to make changes to their diagnoses simply out of fear of being targeted by the woke police. I do not think it makes society a more accepting place for transgender people to coerce others to use certain pronouns, especially for people who haven't transitioned or don't intend to. This sort of mentality has cultivated an insular, unpleasant culture around the transgender movement that is not conducive to your goals.

I don't know if other parts of the country/world have a different approach to it but that's how it's done here -- and honestly I simply don't understand how you could possibly have a problem with it. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were not well-educated about this sort of thing, in which case I apologize for the unwarranted hostility. I have perhaps unfairly characterized your attitude as hostile and malicious when the truth may just be that you didn't know. If this is the case however I do hope you understand where I was coming from!

I was unfairly assuming that you actually knew the facts about what you were speaking out against. You're right, I have been in a bubble -- most people don't have such close experience with the nuances of gender transitioning. My problem is that I always assume the worst of people. I hope you understand where I was coming from, however? Can you imagine how hateful and stupid someone would have to be in order to make such harsh attacks when they knew the all the nuances of the relevant facts? I'm sorry I assumed so little of you -- thanks for giving me the reality check. You're right, nobody is that evil.

I will happily "educate" myself on these issues once the various factions of transgender activists come up with a coherent structure for the language they wish to use.

- If being transgender simply means transitioning from male to female or vice-versa, then why is "transgender" an option when filling out forms in surveys? Aren't transgender people just "male" or "female?"
- If being "transgender" means transitioning along a binary spectrum, does that not still mean that there are only two genders?
- If gender is totally separate from biological sex, why would a transgender person feel the need to alter their body to correspond with a different sex? Wouldn't that make them "transsexual?"
- What is the difference between "gender" and "gender identity" or "gender expression?" If "gender" only means the expression of gender, then what is it expressing?

I have more questions, but if you can answer any of these for me now (in a way that I can universally apply the answers so as not to infuriate any transgender people in the future), I'd actually very much appreciate it. My problem, however, is that there doesn't seem to be any consistency in how these terms are applied, allowing every single "trans rights" person to interpret them however they want. This makes conversation impossible, as everyone is walking on eggshells to avoid saying something "inappropriate."

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

Nobody is saying Sanders is a transphobe.

We're saying BRTD and John Dule are transphobes.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

Nobody is saying Sanders is a transphobe.

We're saying BRTD and John Dule are transphobes.

I've already pointed out this practice can hurt trans people. I don't like it because being asked to publicly state my pronouns would cause me traumatic anxiety, not because of transphobia, but it's really hurtful for many transpeople too.

[John Dule]

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

Nobody is saying Sanders is a transphobe.

We're saying BRTD and John Dule are transphobes.

Throw "Islamophobe" in there too while you're at it; it probably applies and you might as well get all your slurs in at once.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

lmao at how easily I was able to bait the transphobes

[7,052,770]

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

Nobody is saying Sanders is a transphobe.

We're saying BRTD and John Dule are transphobes.

As I've said before, we really need a "High Hanging Fruit Tree" or something for silly posts like this. BRTD is undoubtedly in the bottom 10% of Americans if ranked by how much transphobia they have.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

[John Dule]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

[7,052,770]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

Virtually no one wants that.

[John Dule]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

Virtually no one wants that.

What's wrong with it? I don't want pee-pee police monitoring which bathroom people use either, so if we've come to the agreement that your bathroom use isn't determined by your appearance or your sex at birth, how are gendered bathrooms even enforceable at that point?

[7,052,770]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

Virtually no one wants that.

What's wrong with it? I don't want pee-pee police monitoring which bathroom people use either, so if we've come to the agreement that your bathroom use isn't determined by your appearance or your sex at birth, how are gendered bathrooms even enforceable at that point?

Status quo is already doing a great job. Republicans only started to try to throw trans people out of their preferred bathrooms this decade.

[John Dule]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

Virtually no one wants that.

What's wrong with it? I don't want pee-pee police monitoring which bathroom people use either, so if we've come to the agreement that your bathroom use isn't determined by your appearance or your sex at birth, how are gendered bathrooms even enforceable at that point?

Status quo is already doing a great job. Republicans only started to try to throw trans people out of their preferred bathrooms this decade.

This doesn't really answer my question. The "status quo" enforcement to which you refer would be considered "transphobic" if applied to certain people who clearly don't pass as their preferred gender.

[7,052,770]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

Virtually no one wants that.

What's wrong with it? I don't want pee-pee police monitoring which bathroom people use either, so if we've come to the agreement that your bathroom use isn't determined by your appearance or your sex at birth, how are gendered bathrooms even enforceable at that point?

Status quo is already doing a great job. Republicans only started to try to throw trans people out of their preferred bathrooms this decade.

This doesn't really answer my question. The "status quo" enforcement to which you refer would be considered "transphobic" if applied to certain people who clearly don't pass as their preferred gender.

No? Nobody cared about the "status quo" bathroom rules until Republicans needed a wedge issue to get their base all riled up about. You and I have been peeing next to transmen our whole lives. Our mothers and daughters have been peeing next to transwomen their whole lives. It was never a problem until bad-faith politicians decided to make it one a few years ago.

[John Dule]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

Virtually no one wants that.

What's wrong with it? I don't want pee-pee police monitoring which bathroom people use either, so if we've come to the agreement that your bathroom use isn't determined by your appearance or your sex at birth, how are gendered bathrooms even enforceable at that point?

Status quo is already doing a great job. Republicans only started to try to throw trans people out of their preferred bathrooms this decade.

This doesn't really answer my question. The "status quo" enforcement to which you refer would be considered "transphobic" if applied to certain people who clearly don't pass as their preferred gender.

No? Nobody cared about the "status quo" bathroom rules until Republicans needed a wedge issue to get their base all riled up about. You and I have been peeing next to transmen our whole lives. Our mothers and daughters have been peeing next to transwomen their whole lives. It was never a problem until bad-faith politicians decided to make it one a few years ago.

Okay, we're going in circles here. My question is: Under what circumstances could someone be expelled from a bathroom for using the wrong one, in a world where one's appearance, genitals, and sex at birth are not considered determinants of their assigned bathroom?

[7,052,770]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

Virtually no one wants that.

What's wrong with it? I don't want pee-pee police monitoring which bathroom people use either, so if we've come to the agreement that your bathroom use isn't determined by your appearance or your sex at birth, how are gendered bathrooms even enforceable at that point?

Status quo is already doing a great job. Republicans only started to try to throw trans people out of their preferred bathrooms this decade.

This doesn't really answer my question. The "status quo" enforcement to which you refer would be considered "transphobic" if applied to certain people who clearly don't pass as their preferred gender.

No? Nobody cared about the "status quo" bathroom rules until Republicans needed a wedge issue to get their base all riled up about. You and I have been peeing next to transmen our whole lives. Our mothers and daughters have been peeing next to transwomen their whole lives. It was never a problem until bad-faith politicians decided to make it one a few years ago.

Okay, we're going in circles here. My question is: Under what circumstances could someone be expelled from a bathroom for using the wrong one, in a world where one's appearance, genitals, and sex at birth are not considered determinants of their assigned bathroom?

I don't know, people can go into the bathroom they identify with, and bathroom managers can give it their best good faith effort to accommodate trans people. If an honest mistake happens, everyone can deal with it like mature adults.

You're literally inventing a problem out of thin air that doesn't exist. Did you ever hear about bathroom controversies before this decade? Because trans people were regularly going to the bathroom that matches their identity long before this decade.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

I don't know about John Dule, but I oppose "bathroom bills".

I agree, though at that point we might as well do away with gendered restrooms altogether. If there's no enforcement then there's no point.

Virtually no one wants that.

What's wrong with it? I don't want pee-pee police monitoring which bathroom people use either, so if we've come to the agreement that your bathroom use isn't determined by your appearance or your sex at birth, how are gendered bathrooms even enforceable at that point?

Status quo is already doing a great job. Republicans only started to try to throw trans people out of their preferred bathrooms this decade.

This doesn't really answer my question. The "status quo" enforcement to which you refer would be considered "transphobic" if applied to certain people who clearly don't pass as their preferred gender.

No? Nobody cared about the "status quo" bathroom rules until Republicans needed a wedge issue to get their base all riled up about. You and I have been peeing next to transmen our whole lives. Our mothers and daughters have been peeing next to transwomen their whole lives. It was never a problem until bad-faith politicians decided to make it one a few years ago.

Okay, we're going in circles here. My question is: Under what circumstances could someone be expelled from a bathroom for using the wrong one, in a world where one's appearance, genitals, and sex at birth are not considered determinants of their assigned bathroom?

I don't know, people can go into the bathroom they identify with, and bathroom managers can give it their best good faith effort to accommodate trans people. If an honest mistake happens, everyone can deal with it like mature adults.

You're literally inventing a problem out of thin air that doesn't exist. Did you ever hear about bathroom controversies before this decade? Because trans people were regularly going to the bathroom that matches their identity long before this decade.

Last decade there were less transgenders because it hadn't become a trend yet.  Before the surgery existed there was hardly any evidence they existed.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Yeah, until it "became a trend", everybody just let it bottle up and fill them with bitterness. That's how we're supposed to deal with it.

[Figueira]

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

Nobody is saying Sanders is a transphobe.

We're saying BRTD and John Dule are transphobes.

As I've said before, we really need a "High Hanging Fruit Tree" or something for silly posts like this. BRTD is undoubtedly in the bottom 10% of Americans if ranked by how much transphobia they have.

This isn't an excuse. He doesn't respect non-binary people and has stated that children can't be trans.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

Nobody is saying Sanders is a transphobe.

We're saying BRTD and John Dule are transphobes.

As I've said before, we really need a "High Hanging Fruit Tree" or something for silly posts like this. BRTD is undoubtedly in the bottom 10% of Americans if ranked by how much transphobia they have.

This isn't an excuse. He doesn't respect non-binary people and has stated that children can't be trans.

Yes. It's nice that BRTD opposes bathroom bills (just like it's nice that I'm sure the majority of racists oppose lynching) but if your response to being confronted with actual transgendered people on this board giving good faith and valid reasons for using pronouns is to retreat to "my [handful of] trans acquaintances aren't into that" (a claim that I kinda doubt anyway) then you probably are transphobic.

[Mr. Illini]

It is really incredible how upset some people get when someone does something so casual as to put their pronouns in their bio.

Nobody is mandating that you put your pronouns in your bio, they are CHOOSING to do it because they are comfortable doing so and would like to make the space more comfortable for people who are transgender to do the same.

Step back and ask yourself why you care so much.

[John Dule]

I wouldn’t mind if he did it, but I don’t understand how it suddenly makes him a transphobe or something if he isn’t.

Nobody is saying Sanders is a transphobe.

We're saying BRTD and John Dule are transphobes.

As I've said before, we really need a "High Hanging Fruit Tree" or something for silly posts like this. BRTD is undoubtedly in the bottom 10% of Americans if ranked by how much transphobia they have.

This isn't an excuse. He doesn't respect non-binary people and has stated that children can't be trans.

If this is the bar you're setting, then "transphobia" loses all its meaning because it basically applies to 99% of all Americans.

And the people who say they have transgender kids are committing child abuse.