h a l f b a k e r yBuy 1/4, get 1/4 free.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
I'm kind of wondering how people are going to respond
to
this.
I am known for being skint. However, I also know rather
a
lot of other trans women who are definitely not skint
and
the reason for this is that they have had many of the
career
advantages resulting from being perceived
as male up
until
the point when they transitioned. It also seems to me
that
when you do transition, you're starting a new life. On
the
other hand, many of the trans men I know have done
pretty poorly in career terms due to having been
perceived
as female.
Something can be done about this. When a trans woman
transitions, she should surrender all her assets, which
would I hope go towards paying for her healthcare,
thereby
bypassing the issue of whether it should be paid by public
money. If there's anything left, and there probably
would
be since it's said to cost well under £20 000, it should go
to
an F2M transitioner to pay for his transition and also
bump
up his wealth to the point where it would've been had his
gender identity been respected in the first place.
There are clearly problems with proportions of people
going either way and also for non-binary people.
However,
if you want to be accepted as having a different gender
than you have historically been perceived to be assigned
as, you ought to be able to have your social status
adjusted
accordingly. Also, either way, you get to start a new
life.
[link]
|
| |
First - a question. Is a "trans man" a former man who converts to womanness, or a former woman who transitions to manness? Without knowing which is which, it's a bit hard to follow. |
|
| |
But, as to the idea, I dunno, mate. Should there be pay inequality based on gender or gender identity? No. Should we rectify this? Yes. Should people be up- or down-graded when they change gender? Probably not. |
|
| |
It's often suggested that when people transition male to
female, they want all the good stuff without any of the
bad
stuff and that they are therefore fetishising an idealised,
or
perhaps a caricatured image of femaleness, and also that
male privilege continues after transition. This would be a
way of putting one's money where one's mouth is and
countering that suggestion. |
|
| |
A trans woman is an adult who identifies as female but
was assigned male at birth. |
|
| |
Thing is, I identify as English. If I go to live in Ethiopia, I'd sort of feel I was entitled to take my relative wealth with me. Conversely, if an Ethiopian decides he wants to live in Knightsbridge, I'm not convinced that he should be given extra money to help him do so. |
|
| |
I'm with Max on this - if pay inequality is a bad
thing, then compulsory enforcement of this inequality
probably isn't that great either. |
|
| |
Suggested alternative category choice ... |
|
| |
Science: Health: Stress Relief |
|
| |
Would this include transwomen who are as wealthy as the average woman at transition? |
|
| |
Well yes, it would have to because I'm totally skint and it
would be hypocritical of me to recommend something I
wouldn't do myself. |
|
| |
It would remove the criticism of taking male privilege with
one when one leaves, as it were. |
|
| |
It would also demonstrate perfectly the problem with calling someone who's worse off than you "privileged". |
|
| |
Fishboned, at any rate. It's silly, and not in the humorous way typically found here. |
|
| |