Is deadnaming a trans person equivalent to the N-word?

[Figueira]

But also, this "trans people are reinforcing gender stereotypes" myth is getting really, really tiring. Pick a new lane.

I think this is actually a genuine concern some feminists have, and it's not helpful to dismiss it out of hand. It's hard to deny that many trans people tend to "perform" their gender more intensely that your average cis person, and for someone who's interested in gender becoming a less central part of our lives, that might feel like a step in the wrong direction. I know I've had these concerns in the past and I really don't think it was just bigotry on my part.

There are answers, of course. The most obvious one is that feminists don't go around telling cis women they're being "too feminine" (and ideally, they shouldn't be telling cis men they're "too masculine" either, unless they're expressing their masculinity in harmful ways). To impose genderlessness as a norm would be just as antithetical to feminist goals as imposing femininity and masculinity as norm: the goal is to abolish all gender norms so people are free to express their identities however they prefer. Gender norms do exist in our society, however, and trans people are particularly susceptible to them precisely because much of society does not accept their gender identity: a heightened gender performance might, in many circumstances, help them affirm their gender identity in a society that's skeptical of it. This isn't in any way the fault of trans people, of course: instead, it's the fault of society for not accepting them as such.

No, it's not a genuine concern some feminists have. It's a bad-faith right-wing argument. As soon as a trans person breaks a gender norm (of their actual gender identity) they'll turn around and accuse them of not even trying. They also constantly make fun of trans women for "looking male".

[Figueira]

What I don’t understand is why do trans people need to change their names in the first place? Doesn’t that just reinforce traditional gender stereotypes by implying that the name in question can only be used by a certain gender?

Anecdotally, I know a few trans people who haven't changed their names. I've also met trans people who changed their names even though their previous name was gender-neutral. A lot of the time, it's about distancing from your past self rather than purely a gender thing.

But also, this "trans people are reinforcing gender stereotypes" myth is getting really, really tiring. Pick a new lane.

Good point. Would’ve recommended this post if not for the unnecessary hostility at the end.

Transphobia is unnecessarily hostile.

[Antonio the Sixth]

But also, this "trans people are reinforcing gender stereotypes" myth is getting really, really tiring. Pick a new lane.

I think this is actually a genuine concern some feminists have, and it's not helpful to dismiss it out of hand. It's hard to deny that many trans people tend to "perform" their gender more intensely that your average cis person, and for someone who's interested in gender becoming a less central part of our lives, that might feel like a step in the wrong direction. I know I've had these concerns in the past and I really don't think it was just bigotry on my part.

There are answers, of course. The most obvious one is that feminists don't go around telling cis women they're being "too feminine" (and ideally, they shouldn't be telling cis men they're "too masculine" either, unless they're expressing their masculinity in harmful ways). To impose genderlessness as a norm would be just as antithetical to feminist goals as imposing femininity and masculinity as norm: the goal is to abolish all gender norms so people are free to express their identities however they prefer. Gender norms do exist in our society, however, and trans people are particularly susceptible to them precisely because much of society does not accept their gender identity: a heightened gender performance might, in many circumstances, help them affirm their gender identity in a society that's skeptical of it. This isn't in any way the fault of trans people, of course: instead, it's the fault of society for not accepting them as such.

No, it's not a genuine concern some feminists have. It's a bad-faith right-wing argument. As soon as a trans person breaks a gender norm (of their actual gender identity) they'll turn around and accuse them of not even trying. They also constantly make fun of trans women for "looking male".

Again, this is a concern I had as a feminist when I was starting to familiarize myself with trans issues. Unless you're going to argue that 20-year-old me was a closeted right-winger making bad faith arguments (to myself, apparently?), you might want to be a little more humble with your claims here. This kind of attitude is what makes our side look insufferable and drives away people who could be allies if you just took a moment to calmly explain things to them. It's really disappointing coming from you, since you're usually better than this.

[VBM]

What I don’t understand is why do trans people need to change their names in the first place? Doesn’t that just reinforce traditional gender stereotypes by implying that the name in question can only be used by a certain gender?

Anecdotally, I know a few trans people who haven't changed their names. I've also met trans people who changed their names even though their previous name was gender-neutral. A lot of the time, it's about distancing from your past self rather than purely a gender thing.

But also, this "trans people are reinforcing gender stereotypes" myth is getting really, really tiring. Pick a new lane.

Good point. Would’ve recommended this post if not for the unnecessary hostility at the end.

Transphobia is unnecessarily hostile.

Labelling my question as “transphobic” is laughably stupid and a good example of why the the trans rights movement has not only stagnated, but even started to recede in support

[Horus]

What does "equivalent to the N-word" even mean? Stop using trans people to make stupid points. Deadnaming someone is simply an asshole thing to do, and if you do it you're an asshole, end of story. Simply stay out of other people's business and respect their personal choices.

I didn't just pull this out of thin air. Two posters in another thread said deadnaming a person was just as offensive as calling someone the N word.

[Figueira]

When I posted some things earlier in the thread, I wasn't in the best headspace and should have been more nuanced. VBM, I don't think your question was transphobic, which is why I gave it a legitimate answer in the first part of my post, but it includes a transphobic trope that I've seen a lot of lately, so I'm kind of at the end of my rope with it. But I should have realized that just because I've seen it a lot doesn't mean everyone has. Given your posting history I'm not sure I should be giving you the benefit of the doubt on trans issues, but I'll assume you're at least trying to learn and I'd encourage you to learn more.

But your last comment was unnecessary.

Antonio, I was too dismissive of your argument as well. However, it's still a bit divorced from reality (and I think most people making it haven't spent a lot of time around trans people--which doesn't necessarily make them right-wing or transphobic). I have very rarely met a trans person (especially trans woman) who follows gender roles more than the average cis person. If it was true though, then the remainder of your post is a good rebuttal to that argument, so thank you for posting it.

Regarding the question in the OP, it's a weird comparison that I wouldn't personally make. It's very easy to accidentally call people their deadname, whereas nobody goes around accidentally using the N-word to address Black people.

If it's intentional, and used by someone who didn't know the person prior to them changing their name, that's where it gets into slur territory. Deciding exactly what slur it's equivalent to is oppression Olympics which I'm not interested in getting into.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Antonio, I was too dismissive of your argument as well. However, it's still a bit divorced from reality (and I think most people making it haven't spent a lot of time around trans people--which doesn't necessarily make them right-wing or transphobic). I have very rarely met a trans person (especially trans woman) who follows gender roles more than the average cis person. If it was true though, then the remainder of your post is a good rebuttal to that argument, so thank you for posting it.

That's fair. It's hard not to lose patience and assume the worst of people, especially on the internet where there are a lot of right-wing concern trolls who are just trying to sow division among progressives. I think we should all make an effort to at least assume people are sincere until proven otherwise, but I often fall short of that myself.

I obviously don't have an official metric for gender performance and how it compares between trans and cis people (not do I think it makes any sense to waste time on this, to be clear). Of course trans people run a wide range of gender presentations, just like cis people do. I just think it's understandable why people who, yes, aren't particularly familiar with trans people personally, can get that impression, and in that regard it's useful to have a sound understanding for why that is. Even people who aren't actively bigoted are going to form stereotypical views of groups they're unfamiliar with, and I think we have to engage with these stereotypes in some way if we want to stop them from turning into bigotry.

[Figueira]

Antonio, I was too dismissive of your argument as well. However, it's still a bit divorced from reality (and I think most people making it haven't spent a lot of time around trans people--which doesn't necessarily make them right-wing or transphobic). I have very rarely met a trans person (especially trans woman) who follows gender roles more than the average cis person. If it was true though, then the remainder of your post is a good rebuttal to that argument, so thank you for posting it.

That's fair. It's hard not to lose patience and assume the worst of people, especially on the internet where there are a lot of right-wing concern trolls who are just trying to sow division among progressives. I think we should all make an effort to at least assume people are sincere until proven otherwise, but I often fall short of that myself.

I obviously don't have an official metric for gender performance and how it compares between trans and cis people (not do I think it makes any sense to waste time on this, to be clear). Of course trans people run a wide range of gender presentations, just like cis people do. I just think it's understandable why people who, yes, aren't particularly familiar with trans people personally, can get that impression, and in that regard it's useful to have a sound understanding for why that is. Even people who aren't actively bigoted are going to form stereotypical views of groups they're unfamiliar with, and I think we have to engage with these stereotypes in some way if we want to stop them from turning into bigotry.

A lot of trans people outwardly present in a way that's very stereotypical of their gender identity, because it's the easiest way to get correctly gendered in public, and because, well, that's how they want to look. However, most trans people I've met have had at least some hobbies, interests, and friend groups more stereotypical of a different gender. If you don't personally know any trans people, then it makes sense you would base your judgements on their outward appearance.

But coming from actual transphobes, it's a bad-faith argument because it's not like they're accepting of trans people who break gender norms.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Antonio, I was too dismissive of your argument as well. However, it's still a bit divorced from reality (and I think most people making it haven't spent a lot of time around trans people--which doesn't necessarily make them right-wing or transphobic). I have very rarely met a trans person (especially trans woman) who follows gender roles more than the average cis person. If it was true though, then the remainder of your post is a good rebuttal to that argument, so thank you for posting it.

That's fair. It's hard not to lose patience and assume the worst of people, especially on the internet where there are a lot of right-wing concern trolls who are just trying to sow division among progressives. I think we should all make an effort to at least assume people are sincere until proven otherwise, but I often fall short of that myself.

I obviously don't have an official metric for gender performance and how it compares between trans and cis people (not do I think it makes any sense to waste time on this, to be clear). Of course trans people run a wide range of gender presentations, just like cis people do. I just think it's understandable why people who, yes, aren't particularly familiar with trans people personally, can get that impression, and in that regard it's useful to have a sound understanding for why that is. Even people who aren't actively bigoted are going to form stereotypical views of groups they're unfamiliar with, and I think we have to engage with these stereotypes in some way if we want to stop them from turning into bigotry.

A lot of trans people outwardly present in a way that's very stereotypical of their gender identity, because it's the easiest way to get correctly gendered in public, and because, well, that's how they want to look. However, most trans people I've met have had at least some hobbies, interests, and friend groups more stereotypical of a different gender. If you don't personally know any trans people, then it makes sense you would base your judgements on their outward appearance.

"Outwardly hyperfeminine IT or engineering professional" is a stereotype, sometimes even a self-stereotype, of trans women for a reason! In my experience trans people don't necessarily tend to be less gender-conforming than cis people either (most cis people have at least some "opposite"-gendered hobbies or interests too, unless they have their heads really far up their asses about gender in general), but the surface-level performance can create some pretty jarring juxtapositions when you get to know someone better. People get weird about it in much the same way that they used to get about, say, Marilyn Monroe's "dry" intellectual interests back in the day.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

What I don’t understand is why do trans people need to change their names in the first place? Doesn’t that just reinforce traditional gender stereotypes by implying that the name in question can only be used by a certain gender?

Anecdotally, I know a few trans people who haven't changed their names. I've also met trans people who changed their names even though their previous name was gender-neutral. A lot of the time, it's about distancing from your past self rather than purely a gender thing.

But also, this "trans people are reinforcing gender stereotypes" myth is getting really, really tiring. Pick a new lane.

It's objectively true though.

[Antonio the Sixth]

A lot of trans people outwardly present in a way that's very stereotypical of their gender identity, because it's the easiest way to get correctly gendered in public, and because, well, that's how they want to look. However, most trans people I've met have had at least some hobbies, interests, and friend groups more stereotypical of a different gender.

Yeah, of course. No different from cis people really, as Nathan pointed out. It's just that people pay more attention to these behaviors when they're tied to a group that's less familiar to them. I agree that's unfortunate, of course, but we have to work with it somehow.

If you don't personally know any trans people, then it makes sense you would base your judgements on their outward appearance.

I didn't at 20. I do now. I imagine that's the experience of many people in my generation, though of course it depends on a lot of factors.

But coming from actual transphobes, it's a bad-faith argument because it's not like they're accepting of trans people who break gender norms.

Well, sure. All I'm saying is that it shouldn't on its own be taken as evidence of transphobia or bad faith. But you've already agreed to that, so I don't mean to belabor the point

[Figueira]

What I don’t understand is why do trans people need to change their names in the first place? Doesn’t that just reinforce traditional gender stereotypes by implying that the name in question can only be used by a certain gender?

Anecdotally, I know a few trans people who haven't changed their names. I've also met trans people who changed their names even though their previous name was gender-neutral. A lot of the time, it's about distancing from your past self rather than purely a gender thing.

But also, this "trans people are reinforcing gender stereotypes" myth is getting really, really tiring. Pick a new lane.

It's objectively true though.

It's objectively false, and trans people are in a no-win situation on this one, as I've elaborated in my later posts.

[sting in the rafters]

[Horus]

It was a clown comparison made by two separate posters, but I'm the fool for bringing it to a vote to show how dumb they sounded? k

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

What does "equivalent to the N-word" even mean? Stop using trans people to make stupid points. Deadnaming someone is simply an asshole thing to do, and if you do it you're an asshole, end of story. Simply stay out of other people's business and respect their personal choices.

I didn't just pull this out of thin air. Two posters in another thread said deadnaming a person was just as offensive as calling someone the N word.

Tell me about it. Gaslighting is a bipartisan affair it seems

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Deadnaming a trans person for being evil is analogous to calling a black person the n-word because they're evil.

"Analogous" and "equivalent" do not mean the same thing, horus. Many of the people outraged by the assertion in the title have said far dumber things about trans issues.

[DaleCooper]

Deadnaming a trans person for being evil is analogous to calling a black person the n-word because they're evil.

"Analogous" and "equivalent" do not mean the same thing, horus. Many of the people outraged by the assertion in the title have said far dumber things about trans issues.

It's not analogous either. There's not really any good reason to insult somebody based on their race, but often there is a legitimate reason to use someone's former or legal name.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Deadnaming a trans person for being evil is analogous to calling a black person the n-word because they're evil.

"Analogous" and "equivalent" do not mean the same thing, horus. Many of the people outraged by the assertion in the title have said far dumber things about trans issues.

It's not analogous either. There's not really any good reason to insult somebody based on their race, but often there is a legitimate reason to use someone's former or legal name.

It's analogous in the sense that it's a prejudiced insult deployed as a sort of punishment for unrelated misbehavior. I agree that it's a needlessly incendiary comparison, but I think what's being gotten at does make sense.