For those who wish to participate, there is this



~That is all.

Pardon my ignorance, but who is / was Leelah?

Also, while I salute the moral support - I have posted rainbow pictures of myself on Facebook - I really wonder if these "net activism" campaigns are effective in anyway...

janus : I somewhat remember, I think. Wasn't she someone who got some time on the media after she committed suicide or something? I think the suicide note was the biggest reason she got a lot of coverage after her suicide. It detailed how she was forced by her parents to go to hypnotherapy sessions to "fix" her gender identity issue, among other things, if I recall.

janus :
SWTerra :
SWTerra is correct. Leelah Alcorn committed suicide on December 28, 2014. She gained media attention through her suicide note. Her parents did send her to therapy in which they were not supportive of her gender identity, a practice which is condemned by the medical community. Before saying goodbye, the last thing she said in her suicide note was, "Fix society. Please."

After her death, media outlets picked up several stories of other transgender people, largely youth, taking their own lives. The media's motivation, in large part, is to draw attention to the rampant epidemic of trans suicides. A statistic in common circulation that existed long before these stories were brought to the mainstream, cites that 40% of transgender people attempt suicide. As a transgender person very involved in the community, I'd say those numbers could well be low. I also have personal experience with extreme suicidal ideation and desire, and can attest to most of it coming from how society and family treats me as a transgender person.

Thus, depression and suicidal thoughts result from society's deplorable treatment of the community. Trans women in particular are often constantly harassed, both sexually and verbally, often told they deserve to die.

As far as net activism campaigns, they are a very, very small part of what my community does to improve our situation. Such events serve largely to boost morale in the community by creating a sense of solidarity, of other trans people and our allies. They also provide just a tiny opportunity to educate others who may be sympathetic to the cause, like I'm doing right here in this post.

Thanks both of you for engaging!

I see. Just like the "gay movement" in the 1970s, the "trans movement" can only wait for one thing before they become fully accepted: time. Trying to force change (such as non-discrimination laws) are actually detrimental since employers will hesitate before hiring people they "suspect" are trans.

Do not get me wrong: trans people are citizens like anyone else and should be equal before the law. However private acceptance cannot be forced.

And thanks for educating me on net activism. I always thought it was a futile way to show support, but I never though of it as being a moral support for the "affected" people. I should think of clicking those hashtags more often.

At least this is the sort of net activism campaign I can actually get behind, at least. The ones I have a lot of trouble getting behind are the ones involving stopping terrorism as their goal, like when everyone was overlaying their pictures with the French flag. I never quite understood it and couldn't really jump on that bandwagon.

janus : I heavily disagree with you on the pushing for rights. I completely agree with you on private acceptance, though. You cannot force anyone to believe anything, though you can educate them.

There definitely will be backlash to pushing for transgender acceptance, and some of it will absolutely be dangerous. However, I believe it's vital that we keep pushing. Black people in the Civil Rights era of the 1960s were very active in pushing the federal gov't to end the idiocy that was segregation.

And yet fifty years later, large swaths of the population continue to believe that black people are lesser, or that different races should remain separate in culture and marriage.

Still, I'm glad black people and people of other skin tones came together to pressure the federal government to give them protections against racism, and racism that would continue into the future for decades.

In short, I believe we need to keep fighting for protection, but that it's ridiculous to think the fight for equality ends there.

SWTerra : Yeah, there are definitely net activism campaigns that I think are a lot less effective. Like, I chose not to do the French flag overlay thing either, because it ignored other attacks happening 'round the world at the same time. And I suspect that often communities are divided on how active people should be in those campaigns. Because sometimes, it does seem a bit difficult, to not get into the habit of clicking a hashtag and then feeling self satisfied when there is so much more to do.

CatLady : The problem was, segregation was a thing created by... government. Had the federal government stood up to the 14th Amendment when it should have, Jim Crow laws would had been turned down way before Brown v Board of Education. Also, racial minorities are still being marginalized because of... government. The War on Drugs is the "new Jim Crow" according to a book of the same title, and the author is right.

To come back to transgender people, I do not see the movement becoming as large as the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. While marginalized, trans people have at least all their civil rights and that it the only LEGAL equality that matters. Because "social" equality (being considered on the same level as anyone) takes time. Even today some women are turned down from positions because of their sex.

I don't believe that this is something people should be supporting. Going trans is just really messing up your body, and makes it hard to live truly happily. Even if you change all your organs to match the gender you wish to be, you still have the brain of the other gender/sex as well as the chromosomes.

Sword legion : True, you can not "lie" to your genetics. However, who are we to judge how people should live their lives? Who are we to decide what makes them happy? Sure, transsexuals undergoing the full operation might regret their decision, but as long as no public dime helped them it is NOT our business.

Besides the concept of gender (not sex) IS a social construct. For example, my father stayed at home for the longest time before he went back to college and my mother was the one earning all the income; are they any less of a man and a woman because of that?

janus :

Difference in taste making one happy does not override the functions of the brain which makes a person truly happy in the first place. I don't decided a person's tastes, but it's not that hard to tell when someone is trying to find happiness in a way that does not suite them as a human.

I still choose to use the old version of the word gender. I choose to uphold the original symbol of the rainbow. I choose to acknowledge that the Swastika is a Buddhist symbol even if the Nazi's tried to steal it.

Because identifying gender by physical context is the easiest and clearest, I will identify people as one gender or another based upon what I observe.

I voice against the idea of transgenders because I believe it is a harmful idea. I am not judging them. Yahova will judge those who are to be judged, but I may warn people of how Yahova says Himself how they will be dealt with.

Sword legion : I wanted to stay away from this and not say what I want to say, but if I don't, it'll eat at me.

While I do actually agree with a good majority of that, at the end of the day, it comes down to equal rights. The same way I've mentioned before that I believe that homosexual sex is immoral, I don't understand the idea of changing your gender. I'm very wishy-washy on this point, and can practically wake up with a different view all together for a day.

However, none of that matters.

I can think what I want, sure, but there is only one thing that remains supreme in my mind: acceptance. I'll admit right away that I'm probably far more accepting and tolerant of others' actions (unless they are hurting others intentionally through their actions, that is) than I should be, yes, but I'm sticking with what I say here. No matter my thoughts on the LGBT community, or any other community, for that matter, those communities should not be segregated or singled out and seen as inherently awful people.

And yes, I know that's not exactly what you're arguing, but that's the real reason I, and chances are many others, like to support people like Alcorn; it's not just about being trans. No matter her decision, she should not have been treated to correctional hypnotherapy that, from what little I've read up on it, isn't exactly a pleasant experience. She was looked down upon by even her own family for her decision, which is never something that should occur between close family members, in my opinion.

Ultimately, my biggest problem toward this sort of thing happening is that, sin or no sin, moral or immoral, one action is not a basis for being a jerk to someone, especially in cases where they are otherwise sane, moral, and law-abiding people.

Sword legion : my point exactly: who are YOU to judge? From your Christian perspective, only you god can do it, and doing it yourself exposes you to being judged too. Saying it is a harmful idea shows that you are in fact judging.

Now, I admit that I "assess" gender by sex too, but if the person wants to be called otherwise AND that person does not endanger my life or property, why make a fuss about it? It may take me some time to adjust, but I will still respect that person's desire.

Just like sexual orientation, gender identity is a concept that modern science has a hard time to grasp. The former is definitely not a mental condition but which "source" is still hard to trace back too; the second one still seems too mysterious because of all the taboos surrounding it. Besides, many Native tribes were matriarchal; were they "sick" in some way because of it?

SWTerra : I am glad that (seemingly) conservative people are actually true to their creed of less government. I disapprove of them, and yet you want them to live their lives as long as they hurt no one. You are almost libertarian you know . However I hope you mean LEGAL segregation; turning down ANYONE from service is NOT discrimination.

SWTerra :

If you choose to exercise your right in the United States of America to act as though you were the gender you are not. You must be aware that other people have the right to view and treat you however they wish and even verbally express themselves.

Transgenderism and Homosexuality are not about equal rights. If they were, then a homosexuals would understand that while they have rights regarding the property that they posses ownership over, Others have rights to do what they wish with what they posses.

They can do what they want with their body, and I can do what I want with mine. If they want to be gay, and I enjoy backing cakes for a living, that is my right.

But for some reason, a homosexual can walk into a pastry shop, and force the owner to bake them a wedding cake, or else they will face discrimination fines, ect. The baker is not harming the homosexual, the baker is merely exercising rights of ownership. So, no, this is not about equal rights. The government is not interest in equal rights, but is interested in making all citizens of the U.S. conform to a form of social justice as they see fit. And possibly even the majority of Americans wish to see such social conformity t

You do not own your own property in the U.S. You are a borrower of it and government tells you what you can, and cannot do with it. The government will not even let you build a house on your own land without adhering to building codes for your own safety. Some people may point out that this is so you don't sell a dangerously built house to someone else, which is a good point, but an easy fix to that is making some paperwork that states this house simply cannot ever be sold.

In the case of Joshua Alcorn, the boy made a dumb decision with is life. Was seventeen years of age, so I'm certain his parents still felt they had some control over his life. (He was still living under their roof.) And as most all parents, even if the methods may not have been the greatest, they wished to do what was best for him.

I do not necessarily approve of their means. A proper understanding of the Bible would have done the boy much better while he was young. I know it has served myself and my own family well.

The boy decided to take on a lifestyle that harmful and negative to his well being. We should not support such a person. We should be attacking an ideology that is ruining young men and women in today's society so that it doesn't take more people people away in more self induced consequences.


janus :

Thanks for not reading my post and assuming what religion I adhere too.

Sword legion : I don't believe that it's so much the idea of what it is where we differ, but what we choose to do with it, and I'm fine with that.

I've already mentioned my maxim over these situations, which is to live and let live. I'm not entirely normal, either, and have even questioned my own views on sexuality before, on a good few occasions. So, to me, to attack something that even I've mingled with at points seems rather hypocritical. But, I won't explain it a second time in a row. You just read it, after all.

I don't want to turn this into a debate, so I'll just leave on this note: I'm perfectly fine with your thoughts on the matter, and from what I've read, you at least know that the end shouldn't always justify the means, with your response over the parents and their actions. I think that's the most important thing, regardless of your stance. You still have to maintain a level of respect towards others, whether they oppose you or support you.