groen90 said:
This is the only thing that seems marginally relevant to our situation here, specifically where it says that "sex should be used as a classification" and "gender should be used to refer to a person's self-representation [...] or how that person is responded to by social institutions". This website at its core is not a social institution and it doesn't need to "represent" anything, even more so considering the focus on fictional characters. Its scope is that of organizing art, something which falls very much under "classification" more than anything else. So from a scientific standpoint, as that link suggests, we *should* indeed tag using sex, period.
"If we don't tag Bridget as 1girl we are automatically transphobes and people are LITERALLY going to die" is how I read this.
Look, call me transphobe all you want, I don't even care anymore at this point. I feel like the word has lost all its meaning lately.
"Transphobe" has a meaning don't worry, which roughly means "Discrimination against trans people", discrimination meaning : "A different way of treating certain group of people, generally negatively". Which is, well, what is happening and I think it's not too hard to see as, indeed, trans people are not treated as good as other groups in this website (read until the end to know how). Also, from your sentence I get that you think the world is fine with trans people, showing you didn't really read what I send lol.
And yes, you read that kinda right, because this si true, you can deny it, but science is pretty clear on this subject. People die, and representation is an aspect of it.
Moreover, I can only imagine that you picked exactly what you wanted because, believe it or not I actually read what I send, and I can tell you are saying half truths.
One of the example is that the true citation is :
In the study of human subjects, the term sex should be used as a classification, generally as male or female, according to the reproductive organs and functions that derive from the chromosomal complement [generally XX for female and XY for male].
This is stating that when studying human subjects, classification via sex can be done using the organs and functions. (Which are, again, said to be an incomplete classifications in literal same document). To put it another way, it says "how to do it" not "why/when to do it".
Wait, did you REALLY said "Art is not representation" ? Bro/sis/other, what is art if not representation ? I mean, sorry but honestly how far can you go to avoid trans character, like, come on this is litterally the definition of art xD (Very interesting subject if you wanna read about it btw)
However we are discussing Bridget gender, we can talk about her sex too, I mean it would be fair, but using 1girl is indeed (yet again read what I send) a gendered term and would mean taking into account her gender. Which we can relate to the "Tag what you see" as, sorry to put it this way, but she does look like a girl.
As for the "we are not a social institution". This is directly showing that you didn't do any research. As, already we can debate about the fact that this site is a social institution, but it is at least included in a bigger social institution, being global human interaction. And as far as global human interactions goes, the documents I gave clearly shows that yes, indeed the world is transphobic. Which causes harm to people. Not only that, but the underrepresentation or the misrepresentation of groups of people is causing direct harm to said groups. (And some studies shows that it actually affect other groups too).
I won't lie to you, you bother me so much with your transphobia. The worst part may be that you deny it so much its unbearable. Like, you literally do everything in your power to stop a character from being correctly gendered, how can you not see this is transphobia ?! (This is not the best word here, it works but I'm following a path, sorry non binary folks, I love you)
Even worse, I can tell you consider yourself smart, like it just shows in how to try to correct me and how you spell, anyway. And like, with all your smartness you still didn't do anything to find a solution to a true problem which is correctly gendering a character ? I'm going to bother you a bit on purpose, but this does not seems to be a "smart" solution.
As for the avidd answer, ok, thanks for telling me. I completely disagree with you as it is far from being hard to change anything really. I mean, I know you call me ignorant but I literally read the code of github danbooru, even if heavely modified, I can assure you changing things technically is easy lol.
So yeah, this argument just doesn't stick and falls apart pretty fast. And the "Yeah but I meant how we tag" is also a weak argument, there are plenty of solutions that have been given, the only consistent thing that it always converge to is "What about those that don't want trans character ?!!", which, I mean is straight transphobia, what do you want me to tell, this si definition transphobia xD
Concerning the "can we move on ?". I know you want to, but I didn't really get any significant arguments other than "We do not want to see trans characters" which is blatantly transphobic, I would like you to at least realize that, maybe even say that and then, okay I would know where I am you know.
