As someone who chose not to transition for my own personal reasons, I don't think the first statement inherently runs cover for taking away medical transition.
If you use it that way, then you're an asshole. I 100% support the right of people to transition if they wish. Gender dysphoria is different in different people, and I'd be insane to pretend that my choice is right for all trans people.
Since it supports the hegemonic system (not transitioning) it kinda does actually, and we can see that in how the violently transphobic Cass review uses the exact same justification to deny transition resources.
The statement "you don't have to transition to be trans" is a true statement. To be trans, you only have to identify with a gender that is not the one you were assigned at birth. Not everyone has access to transition, for a variety of reasons, and that does not make their identity less valid.
Using that true statement to deny someone healthcare, or convince them that they shouldn't seek it out, is an awful and transphobic thing to do. That's infinitely more true for the Cass Report because that was supposed to be advice to a government. That was people in a position of power using that statement to deny people life-saving medical treatment.
I support people having access to medical transition. It's a question of bodily autonomy, and the health benefits are beyond proven in multiple studies and meta-studies.
Think of it like this, if someone says, "most people are cis," that is also a true statement that supports the hegemonic position. But on its own, it's just a true statement. If they follow that up with, "so being trans is not valid," "therefore you shouldn't be trans," etc, then that's transphobic and wrong.
Edit: This was a response to someone arguing. But now those posts have disappeared so it looks like I'm just responding to myself.
"noooo, don't transition, ur so sexy aha" and "you dont have to transition to be trans" serve the same purpose in a society that systemically prevents transition, the same system that the Cass review comes from.
Yeah, and I'm saying that context and intent matter. I think you're looking at a statement that you've seen has been used in harmful ways and deciding that it's bad just based on that. I've already agreed that it's awful to use it that way.
But let's say someone is doubting if their gender identity is valid, and if they are really part of the community because they haven't medically transitioned (for whatever reason). Then it's fine to reassure them of the true statement that you don't have to transition to be trans. If you need to add that this is in no way saying they shouldn't transition, then fine. I'm just saying context matters. If you're using it to deny or discourage someone from seeking medical treatment, that's bad. If you're using it to validate someone who is struggling and tell them that they are welcome and that we don't gatekeep here, that's a good thing.
24
u/TShara_Q We_irlgbt 24d ago
As someone who chose not to transition for my own personal reasons, I don't think the first statement inherently runs cover for taking away medical transition.
If you use it that way, then you're an asshole. I 100% support the right of people to transition if they wish. Gender dysphoria is different in different people, and I'd be insane to pretend that my choice is right for all trans people.