we would be monsters - 09.01.2024
okay, let's start with the fact i've transitioned and partly detransitioned, but my situation is pretty unclear, and i like it. i work with people. due to my ambiguous appearance, these people commonly ask me whether i'm a man or a woman, and sometimes tell me it's so that they know how to address me, my native language is a gendered one. my favourte responses to this question include "i don't care, pick which is more convenient for you", "doesn't matter, i'm [redacted profession]", "whichever you prefer, makes no difference", and "whichever you think suits me". i then leave the topic and progress to whatever is my job at the time. the people are then (worth mentioning i work in stem and employees often get perceived differently depending on gender) confused and mildly uncomfortable. i've taken away their shortcuts.
when denied information about a person's sex, one cannot use ready archetypes to fill the gaps in impression and is forced to see them more individually; if one doesn't know whether or not they're talking to a woman, they do not know, and have to actively question, whether to subject that person to misogynistic treatment. it shifts focus from gender-focused to individual-focused, and challenges the two schemes of treatment applies to strangers. it challenges their understanding of gender as natural, universal, obvious and default. that's inconvenient. being told they can pick makes them short circuit; as a rule it causes, aside from the confusion, more attention being paid to both my role as a professional, and my individual traits. someone can say i'm being an idiot because i could just say; well, i could, and when dealing with elderly people or children who need simplicity, i do. generally though, i enjoy seeing the responses to being denied information about a stranger's sex, knowing which is seemingly subconsciously considered a right by most people. of course, i accept whatever they pick and i do not correct them. what do they pick? it varies.
i am a transhumanist - which i post quite a lot about on here; i'm a weird nietzschean who pursues liberation of the species via technology and science, overcoming our own biology and biological limitations. what i include here, aside from obvious if somewhat unrealistic desire to end sickness and mortality, is necessary detachment of reproduction from the female sex and from sexuality and "relegating" it to science (since i doubt entitlement to the female body will end as long as it's a necessary means and resource). it's complete control over one's biological traits and appearance, including, but not limited to, sex traits. it's ending or "abolishing" evolution of the human species as a process - probability-based, corresponding to game theory, working automatically according to both darwinist selections, survival-based and sexual, and by all means "blind". it's replacing said process with logical control over our further development - by logical i don't necessarily mean eugenicist ideal, i mean one that abides to rules of causativity, reasons, causes, goals, results. causativity is the core of human reasoning - it is a result of evolution, the complex human intellect, eventually ending the very process that created it and taking its duties onto itself to further carry them on. wonderful, isn't it? that's already in progress since we invented contraception, an invention rarely appreciated as the gamechanger it was - the human brain going against its genetic programming in the most basic area: refusing reproduction when capable of it. i believe we can and should go further. i believe "playing god" is "good" and desirable, arguably the only thing that may liberate us as a species and individuals, and eventually liberate us from the concept of species itself, perhaps.
i am aware my beliefs are wildly niche, but in light of my beliefs i could not consider modification of sex traits a net negative in itself. i could not consider it, along with other "extreme" body modifications, something that should be banned for adults; particularly as it's a body modification that leads to inability to know a stranger's sex, and thus aids deconstruction of gender archetypes and reasoning in these forms. not only that: it does something else. it challenges naturalism. the general belief that there's a "natural order", and aforementioned order is something the society ought to follow and copy in terms of relations of power, or something that justifies various discriminations, that certain traits are in "nature" of boys and girls as they are born, the last belief known as gender essentialism. all or next to all political conservatism is based in these beliefs; including religious fundamentalism, which always contains some form of naturalism. modification of one's sex traits is unnatural, it goes against what is natural, it goes against what is human - understood as such. the concept of humanity largely doesn't contain the option of blurred traits, and if it does happen naturally - in intersex disorders - it isn't a choice. as a choice, it's powerful. i'm leaving the health aspect alone since i don't believe people who understand possible consequences and complications of medical intervention done solely for aesthetic purposes need to be saved from themselves, and frankly i believe humans should be - often are - allowed to make choices that put their health at risk if they so desire. i also support all or next to all kinds of drugs being legal. i am aware the capitalist relations generate certain issues with my approach; i'll progress to that.
back when i was quite properly a liberal (as of january 2024 i'm not sure of my current political beliefs) and a transsexual, i came into contact with certain ideologies and political approaches that grew around this concept and this ability - i've found that liberal attitudes often play into pink conservatism of the same kind as "eyeliner sharp enough to kill a man" or calling girls who don't wear makeup "pick me"; additionally, that they often play into other liberal attitudes i have problems with, concerning infantilisation, anti-intellectualism, and censorship. i've found that there was a tendency to justify misogyny and homophobia, and most relevantly lesbophobia, with combating transphobia. i've found that there was a tendency to attach moral value to sexual choices which would at times veer into coercive narratives. i have, logically, found myself critical of these attitudes.
i've sought out people who seemed to share these criticisms, and engaged in discussions with them - this time i have found that many of them were lowkey naturalist and opposed to the principle of bodily autonomy. they oftentimes attached moral value to choices of an individual that affected them solely and in worst case scenario were self harm or being a victim to medical abuse (although i didn't see it that way for everyone), and insisted on exaggerated notions of responsibility for other people. worse, absolutely couldn't forgive that i didn't regret the choices i've made about my body, that i liked it despite deciding against future, further changes, and that i was attracted to other transsexual and detransitioned people and loved their bodies. i was chastised for not detransitioning sufficiently or not quickly enough, and specifically for not expressing regret. my lack of the "right" perception of myself - which "should" be that i was harmed and a victim - was allegedly equivalent to encouraging "vulnerable teenagers" to do the same, and i've found there was a lot of entitlement on both sides. this time a different kind of entitlement to my body, entitlement to my life story suiting the "correct" narrative, and finally, entitlement to my misery. there was an unwillingness to accept that even as i didn't make my decisions in a vacuum and there were external factors which impacted them - i am aware of that - i still consider myself to have had agency, and i do not regret most of these choices. i encountered hostility when i refused to be a cautionary tale, and eventually i've found that many accusations of irrational disdain towards the whole demographic of people were, in fact, true. multiple people on that side exhibited that disdain, genuine, unreasoned hatred.
on top of that i've seen most of the conflict was a slapfight between straight people on both sides - and neither my concerns about certain narratives playing into the rape culture nor my concerns about i.e. the potential certain measures meant to "protect children" had for harming gay kids (ex. by outing them to fundamentalist christian parents) were heard or considered worth listening to. even spaces with significant gay presence - on both sides - would echo the attitudes shaped by straight people. i've found a lot of weird, attention seeking poeple would insert themselves into it also; including arguably also me before i've matured enough to know arguing with strangers on the internet is overhwelmingly a waste of time.
i've found that the potential that transition and transsexuality hold to undermine the naturalist ideas has been in most cases neutralised and absorbed by the very systems of power it threatened. the idea that concepts and actions that have potential threatening to the system get appropriated and "remade" into a part of it, in an adjusted "castrated" (yes, as a freud fangirl i had to use that word) form that has lost its bite isn't new and is known at least since debord, but i've thought a bit on how it was utilised in particular in case of transition and transsexuality. i have observed at least 3 tactics the system has used to deal with it, with the threat of monstrosity (i mean this positively and very much am including myself in it) that science generated. here's the ones i could distinguish:
that chance we once had at recognizing transition as an action and a choice, a powerful choice which proves agency in going against what is "natural" is possible and not inherently immoral, was worth pursuing. it's passed, but nowadays i still don't see anything productive in any narrative that refuses to acknowledge it for what it is - a morally neutral choice. i've surrounded myself with smart people without extremist beliefs on this topic who do not annoy me with stupidity. i don't take well to that. i will wherever i am defend homosexual and transgender people and oppose their political recontenxtualisation by whoever, of whatever political agenda. i love homosexuals, i love transsexuals, i love detransitioners. i hope to be forgiven for the length of this and the unsuaully serious tone. i've been encouraged to vocalise these observations somewhere. now back to usual nietzsche-/freudposting.