Hello, lovely people! This video is a continuation of a conversation happening on Dan Brown's
channel, so if you want this video to make sense, I would recommend watching a series
of videos. There's a lot you have to watch. I'm sorry. Dan: I'm not about to apologize
for beginning this conversation from a cis perspective. I've gotta say, I'm a little
put off by the intensity of this gatekeeping. Here I am, enthusiastically seeking understanding
of something that's admittedly a little bit foreign to me only to be bombarded with premature
judgements of who I am. Me: No, Dan, trans people asking you to include trans people
in every level of a discussion about trans people is not gatekeeping, so let's have a
discussion about representation for a moment, shall we? By all means, you can start a conversation
about trans people and include your own perspective. The issue with starting a conversation about
trans people without including a trans person is that it comes off as very one-sided and
aggressive towards the trans community and not very welcoming of positive responses.
Every minority has this expectation put upon them that they have to educate ignorant people
who are not of that minority. This sounds like it could be a good way to spread awareness
and knowledge, but it can actually be really exhausting for the person who has to do all
of the educating. Watching your original video did not make me feel like I was joining in
on a conversation. It made me feel like I had this chore of educating you, and it felt
like I had to defend myself and other trans people. The original video was not at all
welcoming to trans people. It felt like a part that cis people could come to to talk
about all the weird things that trans people do. Dan: Is it like weird when trans people
begin any sort of interaction by saying "he/him pronouns," by specifying their pronouns?"
Me: It's really off-putting to me that it sounds like you're asking for pity because
trans people called you out on your rough beginning to a conversation about trans people.
You have to realize how much importance your one discussion about trans people on YouTube
has because trans people are not represented in the biggest YouTubers. They just aren't.
There aren't that many big trans YouTubers. Because of this, most of the conversations
about trans people that happen on YouTube are facilitated by cisgender people so heck
yeah, we're going to be concerned if you're not representing us well in your conversation.
Dan: Uh, the whole pronoun thing, I think stems from the horrendously sexist, ignorant,
notion that somehow being transgender isn't legitimate, right, it's just a plea for attention
and needling people about nick-picking grammar is just one more way to make sure that you're
always the center of attention. Me: Yes! Amen to that! One of the best things you've said
so far this conversation! Dan: Is it transphobic to entirely rule out dating a pre-op trans
person? Me: My initial reaction is to say that "genital preferences"are not ignorantly
transphobic or that they don't inherently make that person who holds that preference
to be transphobic, and I do think that we need to evaluate why people have genital preferences.
Could they be based in the fact that most people are taught to think that attraction
to women means attraction to vaginas and boobs? Probably, and that is a transphobic idea.
Also, are genital preferences just sometimes a way of saying "I'll date trans people but
so long as I can't tell they're trans" because that's transphobic. Also, could it lazy or
transphobic to hold someone's genitals at a higher importance than like their personality
or their face, especially for people who have only met a handful of trans people? I think
that all of these could potentially be true, and they're definitely something that we need
to evaluate more. This conversation is definitely not even close to being over. Dan: So sex
is a biological construct and therefore is relatively rigid where gender is a social
construct and is relatively fluid? Is it correct to say that many trans people, then, have
a sex that is different from their gender? Me: I won't get too in-depth into this because
I did a video with Ashley Mardell in which I went into pretty lengthy discussion about
this, but sex and gender are both social constructs. Obviously, your biology is what it is. It's
not a social construct. You have your set chromosomes and your genitals. That is fact.
What is a social construct is how we talk about sex. Sex is socially constructed in
that we use words that describe gender - "male" and "female" - to talk about bodies when in
fact bodies have nothing to do with gender. I'm not comfortable with saying that I'm "biologically
female but identify as non-binary" because no part of me is female. I have boobies and
a vajayjay, but I"m not female. That is not a term that resonates with me, and I don't
want anyone to put that onto me. Call me by something else. Create another word to describe
my sex, plz, because I'm not female. And that's about, folks, so thank you, Dan, for bringing
up this topic even though it got sort of heated. I think it's probably going to end on a good
note. Yeah. Yep. Yeah. Ok.