Barriers to transgender people accessing Thailand’s healthcare system

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

But there are already words for non-Transgender people. Men and Women.

 

Can you please explain why we should not just call them men and women? 

That is wrong!

Man does not mean not transgender.

Woman does not mean not transgender.

The only word that I'm aware of that does mean not transgender is cisgender.

You can say that man and woman means not transgender a million times and that wouldn't make it any more FALSE.

[CG1 Blue]

29 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That is wrong!

Man does not mean not transgender.

Woman does not mean not transgender.

The only word that I'm aware of that does mean not transgender is cisgender.

You can say that man and woman means not transgender a million times and that wouldn't make it any more FALSE.

Man = born a man

Transgender man = born a woman, now identifies as a man

 

What part of that is inaccurate? 

 

[Captain Monday]

10 hours ago, scottiejohn said:

This whole thing is just an excuse for the letter brigade to cry "we are being victimised"!

If they would just shut up and get on with their lives among whichever letter group they want to mix with and leave the rest of us in peace the better!

“No justice no peace”

How is your peace disturbed in the struggle against inequality, bigotry, and exclusion anyway?

 

????

[Jingthing]

4 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

Man = born a man

Transgender man = born a woman, now identifies as a man

 

What part of that is inaccurate? 

 

Cisgender is a scientifically based word that you can choose to use or not use when you wish to be PRECISE about stating an OPPOSITE of trans gender identity. 

Find me ONE dictionary where man or woman is defined as a precise opposite of trans gender identity. It doesn't exist because those are general words.

I think people are confused and think there is an agenda to push the use of cisgender in every circumstance. No! It is useful specifically when you want to precisely express an OPPOSITE when the overall context of the discussion is about gender identity. There is no movement for news sources to have headlines like Cisgender Man On Drunken Rampage on Pattaya Beach. People that think there is such a movement are expressing paranoia and hysteria typically ginned up by right wing media bubbles. Demonizing and scapegoating trans people is the flavor these days, so naturally there has also been an attack focus on the word cisgender. It's just a word. It's not a slur. It has it's uses in some contexts. That's all. 

Edited June 29, 2023 by Jingthing

[jacko45k]

13 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

It's quite trendy to view straight White men as being some kind of evil supervillain these days, so any opportunity to deride them in some way cannot be resisted.

And I drive a diesel truck too, and eat meat! I stand no chance.......

[KhunLA]

7 hours ago, Jingthing said:

That is wrong!

Man does not mean not transgender.

Woman does not mean not transgender.

The only word that I'm aware of that does mean not transgender is cisgender.

You can say that man and woman means not transgender a million times and that wouldn't make it any more FALSE.

I can't think of a conversation I've had or situation I will have, where I need to use cis for anything, or any of the other new silly words/pronouns.  I don't know any of my friends or family living an alternative lifestyle, that use or would want me to use any of these silly words.

 

None of us cares about our 'gender' or 'sexuality', or having it the topic of discussion.  It's all pretty obvious.  We live our lives.  

 

Do I really need new words to label people ?  Pop over to friends house, both 40ish yrs old, both same sex at birth, never married or divorced from previous opposite sex marriage, 1 bedroom ... do I really need or care for a new word to label them.  Jim & John or Laura & Lisa will do just fine.  Anything else is obvious, or I simply don't care or need to know.

 

Any new friends, and their lifestyle will become obvious, sooner or later, unless they feel the need to tell me right away, to weed out the bigots.   That's fine and also understandable.

 

When where and how do y'all even have conversation or need for these new words ?   If not for AN, I'd never notice or discuss the silliness.

 

On topic, a doc needs to know one thing, your birth sex, and you don't have to tell them, as it's pretty damn obvious.  If I go to the doc for yearly check up, they won't be ordering a mamma gram or send me to GYN for any extra inspection.   They won't be looking for or trying to check my wife's prostate either.

 

They'll save that prostate exam for me, and both hands better not be on my shoulders or waist when doing the exam ... not unless taking me out for dinner & drinks first ... 

Edited June 30, 2023 by KhunLA

[Yellowtail]

It's all about getting free "gender affirming care". 

 

 

[huangnon]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Cisgender is a scientifically based word that you can choose to use or not use when you wish to be PRECISE about stating an OPPOSITE of trans gender identity. 

Find me ONE dictionary where man or woman is defined as a precise opposite of trans gender identity. It doesn't exist because those are general words.

I think people are confused and think there is an agenda to push the use of cisgender in every circumstance. No! It is useful specifically when you want to precisely express an OPPOSITE when the overall context of the discussion is about gender identity. There is no movement for news sources to have headlines like Cisgender Man On Drunken Rampage on Pattaya Beach. People that think there is such a movement are expressing paranoia and hysteria typically ginned up by right wing media bubbles. Demonizing and scapegoating trans people is the flavor these days, so naturally there has also been an attack focus on the word cisgender. It's just a word. It's not a slur. It has it's uses in some contexts. That's all. 

Do you embrace this garbage to try and remain "relevant" in a society atomized by deliberately divisive politics and weaponizing of language and culture?

Quote

Demonizing and scapegoating trans people is the flavor these days

No it's not. Think about why such a small percentage of people (less than 0.5%) have been thrust into the limelight recently.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, huangnon said:

Do you embrace this garbage to try and remain "relevant" in a society atomized by deliberately divisive politics and weaponizing of language and culture?

No it's not. Think about why such a small percentage of people (less than 0.5%) have been thrust into the limelight recently.

Dude, I can't read minds.

It sounds like you're blaming the victims of cynical manufactured right wing demonization instead of the perpertrators. 

So I suppose you have a list to present of why they deserve to be scapegoated

You hear the same kind of garbage throughout history of why this or that group "deserved" to be persecuted.

Granted there are bad actors within any group of humans, are you suggesting transgender people are a monolith?

Like I said I can't read minds.

So you might consider saying exactly what you're talking about.

Edited June 30, 2023 by Jingthing

[huangnon]

49 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Dude, I can't read minds.

It sounds like you're blaming the victims of cynical manufactured right wing demonization instead of the perpertrators. 

So I suppose you have a list to present of why they deserve to be scapegoated

You hear the same kind of garbage throughout history of why this or that group "deserved" to be persecuted.

Granted there are bad actors within any group of humans, are you suggesting transgender people are a monolith?

Like I said I can't read minds.

So you might consider saying exactly what you're talking about.

You've gone so far down the bi-partizan political divide (left v right, "good" v "bad") that you've lost perspective on facts and reality. (It's the same money backing both sides, btw).

Transgender people are not being 'victimized' at all. This agenda is just served up by a media to create division and permission for censorship and curbs on freedom of speech. Amongst other thngs.

[FruitPudding]

On 6/26/2023 at 5:39 PM, StayinThailand2much said:

"Cisgender" sounds a bit like a disease... What's wrong with the good old 'heterosexual'? (I know it's not 100% the same, but I don't feel comfortable to get labelled with 'weird' words, only because a small minority, who feels they are something else than what they actually are, feels more comfortable thanks to such, relatively new, labels...

Exactly

 

Why is it okay for the transformers to label us as "cisgender"?

 

I don't want to be called that. I am just a man.

[Jingthing]

38 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

Exactly

 

Why is it okay for the transformers to label us as "cisgender"?

 

I don't want to be called that. I am just a man.

Must be rough. 

[FruitPudding]

8 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Must be rough. 

I'll remember to have the same attitude when I am misgendering a member of the LGBTQ community. ????

[Jingthing]

Just now, FruitPudding said:

I'll remember to have the same attitude when I am misgendering a member of the LGBTQ community. ????

You do you.

But that's a different thing.

Categorizing a person as cisgender if they are cisgender is a simple objective fact. 

[FruitPudding]

6 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

You do you.

But that's a different thing.

Categorizing a person as cisgender if they are cisgender is a simple objective fact. 

Cisgender is a label that's been made up - it isn't an objective fact.

 

It's no more a simple objective fact than calling a ladyboy a man.

 

The fact you can't see the double standard here is ironic and hilarious.

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by FruitPudding

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

Cisgender is a label that's been made up - it isn't an objective fact.

 

It's no more a simple objective fact than calling a ladyboy a man.

 

The fact you can't see the double standard here is ironic and hilarious.

 

Based on your post, I don't think that you know the definition of cisgender.

[worgeordie]

28 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Based on your post, I don't think that you know the definition of cisgender.

I don't either ,is that another letter to add on to LGBTQA+C , I see in your posts

you miss off the  A and +  folks don't you recognize them , who, whatever they are.

 

regards Worgeordie

[huangnon]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes they are. 

If we can't agree on basic objective facts, there is zero basis for further discussion.

Record number of anti-LGBTQ bills have been introduced this year | CNN Politics

 

Rubbish. How is legislating against "drag shows" in schools 'victimizing' transgender people.?

 

Your link is from CNN which is in the forefront of promoting this whack agenda.. The same organ calling for ramping up nuclear brinksmanship, weapons and war games in Ukraine, yet crying about imagined aggression against less than 0.5 % of the US population.

[FruitPudding]

15 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Based on your post, I don't think that you know the definition of cisgender.

I do.

 

But cisgender is not a name that everyone appreciates being called.

 

It's ironic that a member of the LGBTQ community doesn't understand that.

 

It's a ridiculous double standard

 

In recent years, the LGBTQ community has been labelling others "cis" while at the same time demanding that they are not labeled in a way that displeases them

 

 

[Jingthing]

42 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

I don't either ,is that another letter to add on to LGBTQA+C , I see in your posts

you miss off the  A and +  folks don't you recognize them , who, whatever they are.

 

regards Worgeordie

No.

It's not such a letter.

 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

I do.

 

But cisgender is not a name that everyone appreciates being called.

 

It's ironic that a member of the LGBTQ community doesn't understand that.

 

It's a ridiculous double standard

 

In recent years, the LGBTQ community has been labelling others "cis" while at the same time demanding that they are not labeled in a way that displeases them

 

 

Absurd level of possibly willful misunderstanding and false conflation.

[Jingthing]

32 minutes ago, huangnon said:

Rubbish. How is legislating against "drag shows" in schools 'victimizing' transgender people.?

 

Your link is from CNN which is in the forefront of promoting this whack agenda.. The same organ calling for ramping up nuclear brinksmanship, weapons and war games in Ukraine, yet crying about imagined aggression against less than 0.5 % of the US population.

We have nothing to discuss as you deny basic facts 

[scottiejohn]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

You do you.

But that's a different thing.

Categorizing a person as cisgender if they are cisgender is a simple objective fact. 

It might be fact in your eyes but is objectionable to our ears. 

Please stop your tirade on this pointless word as you are doing yourself and what you seem to stand for no good at all!

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

It might be fact in your eyes but is objectionable to our ears. 

Please stop your tirade on this pointless word as you are doing yourself and what you seem to stand for no good at all!

What I stand for?

[scottiejohn]

50 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

I don't either ,is that another letter to add on to LGBTQA+C , I see in your posts

you miss off the  A and +  folks don't you recognize them , who, whatever they are.

 

regards Worgeordie

Don't forget you need to add numbers as well;

 

The LGBTQIA2+ Community: Our Pronouns, When and How To Use Them (austincc.edu)

 

[scottiejohn]

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Absurd level of possibly willful misunderstanding and false conflation.

So the answer is you don't understand our objections!

[onthedarkside]

A reported post with edited quote that took it out of context has been removed.

 

 

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

So the answer is you don't understand our objections!

I think they are based on willful ignorance and hysteria.

I see it as fake manufactured outrage.

The word is a neutral descriptive adjective 

Also who used it specifically about you personally?

 

Edited June 30, 2023 by Jingthing

[Longwood50]

13 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Man does not mean not transgender.

Woman does not mean not transgender.

The only word that I'm aware of that does mean not transgender is cisgender.

You can say that man and woman means not transgender a million times and that wouldn't make it any more FALSE.

Now it was either George Herbert Walker Bush or Ronald Reagan who said if you have 5 men in the room, 5 women in the room and 5 dogs in the room and said that the dogs were people how many people would be in the room.  After many false answers he explained that there were 10 people in the room.  Calling them something else did not in fact transform them into people. 

There are two sexes.  Male and Female.  Now you can call people whatever you want however the fact remains that there are only two and coming up with some new terminolgy to somehow define them does not change that fact. 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

Now it was either George Herbert Walker Bush or Ronald Reagan who said if you have 5 men in the room, 5 women in the room and 5 dogs in the room and said that the dogs were people how many people would be in the room.  After many false answers he explained that there were 10 people in the room.  Calling them something else did not in fact transform them into people. 

There are two sexes.  Male and Female.  Now you can call people whatever you want however the fact remains that there are only two and coming up with some new terminolgy to somehow define them does not change that fact. 

Cisgender does not refer to sex.

The word is about gender identity.

Woof woof.

Edited June 30, 2023 by Jingthing