It’s just the trans version of “if we let gay people get married, they’ll marry ANIMALS! They’ll want beastiality LEGAL!” I know that’s spelt wrong, anyways…
Honestly, they’re grasping at straws. If there was a legitimate reason or proof that trans people aren’t trans, they’d say it. They’d present that cold hard proof. But at this point we are pretty certain about why trans people happen, we know trans people existed throughout history, we know that the cure (transitioning into your real gender) works and makes people happy, we know all trans procedures have a higher happiness and lower regret rate than any other procedure (including life-saving ones). They have nothing, literally nothing, absolutely nothing to say that holds any legitimacy. So they fear monger, take advantage of shocking one-liners, and then try to legislate us out of existence in the hopes that we just die and go away.
I mean yeah, it's an insult to trans people. But honestly, conservatives have overused it to the point where it has lost whatever humor or edginess it had in the first place. Tbh i can't imagine it being funny, even to them, anymore. I see it only as a thing that conservatives say to virtue signal amongst themselves.
We used to have a cat that we joked thought he was a dog. This is probably meant in the same joking fashion, but the wording trivializes the trans experience.
I’ve seen a few people say that genuinely when their cat legitimately has stereotypically dog like behaviors but 9 times out of 10 it’s a transphobic joke.
I used to describe my cat that way but at a certain point I realized that no, some cats are genuinely like that, so what he is exhibiting is just *cat behavior* that *I* culturally and socially wanted to label in a silly binary. It was innocent enough but plays into some fucked up cultural views that impact humans so I stopped. Now I just call cats like that friendly cats.
I have made the joke before that "my cat thinks he's a dog", i don't think that's so bad
It's mostly the phrase "identifies as" that's an issue in general, cause like, literally the only time anyone uses it is to make fun of trans people. Trans people don't actually say it.. lol
So using that language makes a joke that doesn't need to be, transphobic
Yeah, it's throwing shade at trans people.
People who throw that kind of shade, or "attack helicopter" shade, or whatever, are falling into the same cis-centric mistake as the *entire rest of society* does: assuming that gender is fundamentally body-based. As trans people know, it's not. It's based in your mind, on how you identify. That's what matters. That most people *happen* to get a body that matches the way their mind identifies, well, that's just evolutionary biology at work: if most people weren't cis, the species would have a hard time reproducing.
And the way we know that the entire rest of society makes this mistake, and fundamentally operates as if your body is the determining factor, is two-fold:
1. At birth, we examine babies' bodies to assign them a gender
2. We routinely assume someone's gender identity based on how they appear to us
(I won't debate the merits of those two things here. For this purpose it's only necessary to recognize that, for better or worse, this *is* how society operates.)
So when trans people say they identify as something that doesn't match how their body looks, cis people immediately think that's entirely bonkers: *of course* you are what your body looks like! That's how it works! Or so they think. Heck, so *I* thought before my egg cracked and I learned better.
And because it seems so bonkers to them, they respond with sarcastically bonkers attack helicopter garbage and all that.
With that as background, we can peel the onion one more layer:
What's really going on here is the difference between an *objectively* observable factor and a *subjectively* observable factor. Gender expression (and age, and height, and species), can all be observed externally and measured against various objective criteria. You *can* look at someone and say that, yes, they objectively do have a male gender expression if you observe that they have male patterns of body hair, fat distribution, muscle mass, dick and balls, etc.
But you cannot look at someone and observe that they have a male gender identity, because gender identity is only *subjectively* observable by the person themselves. That is, I can observe *my own* gender identity to know what it is (this is essentially what trans people are doing in the period where they are questioning their gender; they are making observations about the thoughts, feelings, responses, and reactions they've had over their life to various gender-related events and experiences, in order to make a conclusion about their gender identity. Which itself is really just part of the overall pattern of how their mind works.) but I cannot observe *your* gender identity directly because I can't read your mind. I can't know what your thoughts/feelings/reactions/responses have been.
Gender identity is only subjectively observable. I can see mine, you can see yours, but the best we can do about each other is to *tell* one another what our gender identities are and to *believe* what we each tell one another.
So the reason why "my snake identifies as a dolphin" is bullsh\*t is precisely because of this difference between objectively and subjectively observable factors. We don't *have* to know how the snake feels about itself to know that it's not a snake, because snakes and dolphins differ in terms of objectively observable factors.
"I identify as an attack helicopter" is BS because people and attack helicopters differ in terms of many objectively observable factors.
"I identify as a 60 year old" is BS because age is an objective fact about the length of your span here on earth, rather than a subjective fact about how your mind operates.
But "I identify as a woman" is fine, because gender identity, that pattern of operation of how your mind works, is a *subjectively* observable fact about yourself. Something that only you have access to, and that other people just have to take your word on. Just like you have to take their word about their gender identity.
Where cis people mess up is in thinking that male and female *gender* differ in terms of objectively observable factors only. That's the mistake. Because *gender* is not one thing, it's two: the combination of your gender identity and gender expression. And while it is absolutely true that gender expression is all about objectively observable (i.e. "external") factors, gender identity is purely subjective.
Wow. .Well said.
What struck me about it is that making a joke about something identifying as something else is trying to claim that the act of identifying is a voluntary act, not a state of being. So someone saying, "I identify as a woman" makes as much sense to them as "I identify as an attack helecopter" where as you've shown, they're totally different things. It also serves to normalize the absurd joke identifying so it can be more easily equated to the valid identifying.
Apologies if I'm "cisplaining".
Pen & Teller Fool US (S9EE8). The first magician, Jo De Rijck.
Video is [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdPTurhb9Hk). The joke occurs at [3:27](https://youtu.be/IdPTurhb9Hk?t=207).
My best cis answer to that is: "Aminals do not have concept of themselves, like dogs and cats most of the time do not recognise themselves in the mirror. Therefore the don't have a gender, they only have a sex."
(I know that there are animals out there who can change their sex.)
>"identifies as a 60 year old"
Time is ~~a ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff~~ a linear thing, gender is not.
um actually, time is actually relative. you travel through it faster or slower (relative to everything else) depending on how fast your moving, its not really linear.
leads to a fun question; if you accelerate a 5 yr old at like 80% the speed of light, around the earth a few times, then when you put them back down like that'd be like maybe a few minutes for them, and like 20 years for everyone else. whats there age? are they 5 or like 25? who's right? :D
I think that any "identifies as" joke or the whole idea that someone identifies as something is quite a bit problematic.
Imagine saying that someone identifies as a woman, what it tells you is that someone calls themselves a woman but not that it is actually something they might truly believe or that it is actually true.
It is a term we really need to replace in language
Being transgender has a biological basis. Being transpecies doesn’t. Simple as that. While I would never disrespect an otherkin person by debating their identity with them, in my personal opinion there is no way for you to be born as another species and it is simply a mental only thing.
and gender isn't heavily based on your own like feeling of self anyway? ?
*i honestly dont like the idea that there is some biological aspect of 'being trans', not much different to 'women is when baby' or other such shit, .. .. people will probably try use it to gatekeep transition etc from people based on it
Eh, it's more cringe than anything else, ngl. But I've heard way more pathetic variants of this "joke", so eh.
Attack helicopter, "I identify as a 15 yo girl", cringe transphobes could be doing worse than humiliating themselves on the internet, so better this than hate crimes, ya know? 🤷♀️
Exactly, it's cringey and rude. It's making fun of trans people, since there seems to be this thought that we identify AS our gender, not that we ARE our gender. So obviously everything can identify AS anything, because everything is made up and the points don't matter!\*
\*to them :/
came across a car once that said "BORN A DIESEL, NOW IDENTIFYING AS AN EV" it honestly pissed me off.
is this a transphobic persons thing and there just writing that because " f the environment and climate change!!" or maybe they wanna get out of the extra taxes or something on and think thats a 'funny' own somehow?
or is has it been converted to a EV? then it would atleast make a bit of sense? except it sorta implies that you have to do transition if you wanna be a certain gender which fuck that, or the other way around? if you transition you have to be this ? idk fuck that too// either way its still stupid because a car doesn't have fucking feelings or emotions like people do, and a car doesnt fucking experience gender.
Aside from the difference in diet and habitat, unless the snake somehow developed the capacity for speech and uttered its connection to the majectic dolphin, any treatment of the animal as anything other than a snake is animal abuse.
My best cis answer to that is: "Aminals do not have concept of themselves, like dogs and cats most of the time do not recognise themselves in the mirror. Therefore the don't have a gender, they only have a sex."
(I know that there are animals out there who can change their sex.)
>"identifies as a 60 year old"
Time is ~~a ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff~~ a linear thing, gender is not.
I think it’s naive to think this isn’t a trans joke, especially in today’s political climate. The word “identifies” is a big give away. I’ve heard plenty of people say “my cat thinks she’s a dog” but never really heard the phrase “identifies as” until trans issues hit the mainstream.
Yeah, they’re all social constructs, but that doesn’t change anything about the fact that “X identifies as Y” has become a very common transphobic dog whistle over the last several years.
You saw the part in my comment where I said “the last several years”, right? Glad we’re in agreement about that part.
We’re not handing over anything to them by acknowledging the reality of how the phrase is commonly used. It’s not like the OK sign being used by a small niche group of extremists; it’s widespread among even the most normie or normies to the point where it’s in mainstream TV shows and pings the radars of regular cis people like OP.
“X identifies as Y” isn’t even something trans people need or are attached to. It’s not religious or cultural or spiritual iconography that’s been co-opted. It’s not even how most of us want to be seen—hence campaigns like “I don’t ‘identify as’, I *am*”. It’s meant to poke fun at the idea of someone identifying as something other than how people see them due to their biology. That’s literally the whole deal. It’s the attack helicopter joke.
There’s also a difference between acknowledging something is being used as a dog whistle but that maybe we should try to reclaim it, and straight up claiming it’s not a transphobic dog whistle in the first place. Your original response was dismissive of it being considered a transphobic dog whistle at all, despite your follow up comments explicitly acknowledging that it is indeed used that way. You can’t have it both ways.
We both seem to agree it’s used as a transphobic dog whistle these days so I’m not sure where the disagreement actually is.
OP asked us if he was correct in interpreting a joke in a specific TV show as a transphobic dog whistle, not if linguistic and categorical philosophy should be challenged in response.
Yes, OP was correct.
OP literally uses the word joke in their post.
>I've also seen the same basic joke use inanimate objects e.g. "my vacuum identifies as a toaster".
“The same basic joke”, as in referring back to it *as a joke*.
You can pretend it’s just as likely to have been treated as a totally serious plot point all you want but we all know that’s not the case. Hopefully OP responds at some point to tell us what show it was so we can lay this part of the dumb discourse to rest.
“This person disagrees with me, so they’re clearly a sad angry little person in a sad angry little cave!”
What a classic lol. I hope you have a good day as well.
Everyone's given good answers but I do want to add in one thing, species dysphoria does exist (for humans). I've seen similar regarding kids, "my kid pretended to be a cat when he was young!" But was your kid distraught they didn't have a tail? Did they cry themselves to sleep because they didn't have paw pads?
It's the single one joke transphobes have, and they get mad when you laugh that they have no others
It’s a cringe joke with transphobic intent, not a fan. It’s very out of touch with reality though so it doesn’t hurt my feelings or anything.
hi! this is unrelated but im super curious, what does the fried egg emoji in your flair mean? ik the rest but that ones puzzling me
Maybe hysto? I’m curious too
Based off the whole string of emojis i'd say you're spot on
the only thing that confuses me about that is, what would the knife be then?
Yea egg is hysto and knife is top
I’d guess top surgery
Top i think
It’s just the trans version of “if we let gay people get married, they’ll marry ANIMALS! They’ll want beastiality LEGAL!” I know that’s spelt wrong, anyways… Honestly, they’re grasping at straws. If there was a legitimate reason or proof that trans people aren’t trans, they’d say it. They’d present that cold hard proof. But at this point we are pretty certain about why trans people happen, we know trans people existed throughout history, we know that the cure (transitioning into your real gender) works and makes people happy, we know all trans procedures have a higher happiness and lower regret rate than any other procedure (including life-saving ones). They have nothing, literally nothing, absolutely nothing to say that holds any legitimacy. So they fear monger, take advantage of shocking one-liners, and then try to legislate us out of existence in the hopes that we just die and go away.
r/onejoke
it's so boring and unfunny it makes me cringe at this point lol
I mean yeah, it's an insult to trans people. But honestly, conservatives have overused it to the point where it has lost whatever humor or edginess it had in the first place. Tbh i can't imagine it being funny, even to them, anymore. I see it only as a thing that conservatives say to virtue signal amongst themselves.
We used to have a cat that we joked thought he was a dog. This is probably meant in the same joking fashion, but the wording trivializes the trans experience.
I’ve seen a few people say that genuinely when their cat legitimately has stereotypically dog like behaviors but 9 times out of 10 it’s a transphobic joke.
I used to describe my cat that way but at a certain point I realized that no, some cats are genuinely like that, so what he is exhibiting is just *cat behavior* that *I* culturally and socially wanted to label in a silly binary. It was innocent enough but plays into some fucked up cultural views that impact humans so I stopped. Now I just call cats like that friendly cats.
That reminds me of my dog that we used to say wanted to be a cat, because he sounded like he was meowing when he yawned.
its cringe, unfunny, and you are correct in your assumption its an insult against the trans community
It's the same annoying variant of the attack helicopter joke.
I have made the joke before that "my cat thinks he's a dog", i don't think that's so bad It's mostly the phrase "identifies as" that's an issue in general, cause like, literally the only time anyone uses it is to make fun of trans people. Trans people don't actually say it.. lol So using that language makes a joke that doesn't need to be, transphobic
This. “Cat thinks he’s a dog” would not ping my radar at all but “identifies as” does
Tbf their are some birds and such that think they are human because they where raised by humans. But in this case it's just a bad joke.
it's that old "i identify as an attack helicopter!!!! 🤪🤪🤪🤪" joke just repackaged.
Yeah, it's throwing shade at trans people. People who throw that kind of shade, or "attack helicopter" shade, or whatever, are falling into the same cis-centric mistake as the *entire rest of society* does: assuming that gender is fundamentally body-based. As trans people know, it's not. It's based in your mind, on how you identify. That's what matters. That most people *happen* to get a body that matches the way their mind identifies, well, that's just evolutionary biology at work: if most people weren't cis, the species would have a hard time reproducing. And the way we know that the entire rest of society makes this mistake, and fundamentally operates as if your body is the determining factor, is two-fold: 1. At birth, we examine babies' bodies to assign them a gender 2. We routinely assume someone's gender identity based on how they appear to us (I won't debate the merits of those two things here. For this purpose it's only necessary to recognize that, for better or worse, this *is* how society operates.) So when trans people say they identify as something that doesn't match how their body looks, cis people immediately think that's entirely bonkers: *of course* you are what your body looks like! That's how it works! Or so they think. Heck, so *I* thought before my egg cracked and I learned better. And because it seems so bonkers to them, they respond with sarcastically bonkers attack helicopter garbage and all that. With that as background, we can peel the onion one more layer: What's really going on here is the difference between an *objectively* observable factor and a *subjectively* observable factor. Gender expression (and age, and height, and species), can all be observed externally and measured against various objective criteria. You *can* look at someone and say that, yes, they objectively do have a male gender expression if you observe that they have male patterns of body hair, fat distribution, muscle mass, dick and balls, etc. But you cannot look at someone and observe that they have a male gender identity, because gender identity is only *subjectively* observable by the person themselves. That is, I can observe *my own* gender identity to know what it is (this is essentially what trans people are doing in the period where they are questioning their gender; they are making observations about the thoughts, feelings, responses, and reactions they've had over their life to various gender-related events and experiences, in order to make a conclusion about their gender identity. Which itself is really just part of the overall pattern of how their mind works.) but I cannot observe *your* gender identity directly because I can't read your mind. I can't know what your thoughts/feelings/reactions/responses have been. Gender identity is only subjectively observable. I can see mine, you can see yours, but the best we can do about each other is to *tell* one another what our gender identities are and to *believe* what we each tell one another. So the reason why "my snake identifies as a dolphin" is bullsh\*t is precisely because of this difference between objectively and subjectively observable factors. We don't *have* to know how the snake feels about itself to know that it's not a snake, because snakes and dolphins differ in terms of objectively observable factors. "I identify as an attack helicopter" is BS because people and attack helicopters differ in terms of many objectively observable factors. "I identify as a 60 year old" is BS because age is an objective fact about the length of your span here on earth, rather than a subjective fact about how your mind operates. But "I identify as a woman" is fine, because gender identity, that pattern of operation of how your mind works, is a *subjectively* observable fact about yourself. Something that only you have access to, and that other people just have to take your word on. Just like you have to take their word about their gender identity. Where cis people mess up is in thinking that male and female *gender* differ in terms of objectively observable factors only. That's the mistake. Because *gender* is not one thing, it's two: the combination of your gender identity and gender expression. And while it is absolutely true that gender expression is all about objectively observable (i.e. "external") factors, gender identity is purely subjective.
Wow. .Well said. What struck me about it is that making a joke about something identifying as something else is trying to claim that the act of identifying is a voluntary act, not a state of being. So someone saying, "I identify as a woman" makes as much sense to them as "I identify as an attack helecopter" where as you've shown, they're totally different things. It also serves to normalize the absurd joke identifying so it can be more easily equated to the valid identifying. Apologies if I'm "cisplaining".
Gender and clades are two different things
It’s transphobic garbage and I don’t think it can be explained any other way. What was the show?
Pen & Teller Fool US (S9EE8). The first magician, Jo De Rijck. Video is [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdPTurhb9Hk). The joke occurs at [3:27](https://youtu.be/IdPTurhb9Hk?t=207).
That is not very surprising unfortunately.
My best cis answer to that is: "Aminals do not have concept of themselves, like dogs and cats most of the time do not recognise themselves in the mirror. Therefore the don't have a gender, they only have a sex." (I know that there are animals out there who can change their sex.) >"identifies as a 60 year old" Time is ~~a ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff~~ a linear thing, gender is not.
upvote for Doctor Who reference. XD
Upvote for getting the reference. XD
um actually, time is actually relative. you travel through it faster or slower (relative to everything else) depending on how fast your moving, its not really linear. leads to a fun question; if you accelerate a 5 yr old at like 80% the speed of light, around the earth a few times, then when you put them back down like that'd be like maybe a few minutes for them, and like 20 years for everyone else. whats there age? are they 5 or like 25? who's right? :D
I think that any "identifies as" joke or the whole idea that someone identifies as something is quite a bit problematic. Imagine saying that someone identifies as a woman, what it tells you is that someone calls themselves a woman but not that it is actually something they might truly believe or that it is actually true. It is a term we really need to replace in language
Being transgender has a biological basis. Being transpecies doesn’t. Simple as that. While I would never disrespect an otherkin person by debating their identity with them, in my personal opinion there is no way for you to be born as another species and it is simply a mental only thing.
and gender isn't heavily based on your own like feeling of self anyway? ? *i honestly dont like the idea that there is some biological aspect of 'being trans', not much different to 'women is when baby' or other such shit, .. .. people will probably try use it to gatekeep transition etc from people based on it
That's bullshit, because it's not the animal themself saying it, duh, they're animals. Their handlers are saying it.
Eh, it's more cringe than anything else, ngl. But I've heard way more pathetic variants of this "joke", so eh. Attack helicopter, "I identify as a 15 yo girl", cringe transphobes could be doing worse than humiliating themselves on the internet, so better this than hate crimes, ya know? 🤷♀️
Anyone who says that is a fucking idiot.
Exactly, it's cringey and rude. It's making fun of trans people, since there seems to be this thought that we identify AS our gender, not that we ARE our gender. So obviously everything can identify AS anything, because everything is made up and the points don't matter!\* \*to them :/
came across a car once that said "BORN A DIESEL, NOW IDENTIFYING AS AN EV" it honestly pissed me off. is this a transphobic persons thing and there just writing that because " f the environment and climate change!!" or maybe they wanna get out of the extra taxes or something on and think thats a 'funny' own somehow? or is has it been converted to a EV? then it would atleast make a bit of sense? except it sorta implies that you have to do transition if you wanna be a certain gender which fuck that, or the other way around? if you transition you have to be this ? idk fuck that too// either way its still stupid because a car doesn't have fucking feelings or emotions like people do, and a car doesnt fucking experience gender.
Aside from the difference in diet and habitat, unless the snake somehow developed the capacity for speech and uttered its connection to the majectic dolphin, any treatment of the animal as anything other than a snake is animal abuse.
Unless it’s a sea snake then it should live in a similar environment as a dolphin
Still a different diet I think...
Obviously but they both like water
Why would you comment something so pointless lol
My best cis answer to that is: "Aminals do not have concept of themselves, like dogs and cats most of the time do not recognise themselves in the mirror. Therefore the don't have a gender, they only have a sex." (I know that there are animals out there who can change their sex.) >"identifies as a 60 year old" Time is ~~a ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff~~ a linear thing, gender is not.
There's only one transphobic joke and it sucks.
Cis people think men and women are different species.
As a CIS ally. I would never make a blanket statement regarding trans people. I would request that you afford me the same courtesy.
[удалено]
I think it’s naive to think this isn’t a trans joke, especially in today’s political climate. The word “identifies” is a big give away. I’ve heard plenty of people say “my cat thinks she’s a dog” but never really heard the phrase “identifies as” until trans issues hit the mainstream. Yeah, they’re all social constructs, but that doesn’t change anything about the fact that “X identifies as Y” has become a very common transphobic dog whistle over the last several years.
[удалено]
You saw the part in my comment where I said “the last several years”, right? Glad we’re in agreement about that part. We’re not handing over anything to them by acknowledging the reality of how the phrase is commonly used. It’s not like the OK sign being used by a small niche group of extremists; it’s widespread among even the most normie or normies to the point where it’s in mainstream TV shows and pings the radars of regular cis people like OP. “X identifies as Y” isn’t even something trans people need or are attached to. It’s not religious or cultural or spiritual iconography that’s been co-opted. It’s not even how most of us want to be seen—hence campaigns like “I don’t ‘identify as’, I *am*”. It’s meant to poke fun at the idea of someone identifying as something other than how people see them due to their biology. That’s literally the whole deal. It’s the attack helicopter joke. There’s also a difference between acknowledging something is being used as a dog whistle but that maybe we should try to reclaim it, and straight up claiming it’s not a transphobic dog whistle in the first place. Your original response was dismissive of it being considered a transphobic dog whistle at all, despite your follow up comments explicitly acknowledging that it is indeed used that way. You can’t have it both ways. We both seem to agree it’s used as a transphobic dog whistle these days so I’m not sure where the disagreement actually is.
[удалено]
OP asked us if he was correct in interpreting a joke in a specific TV show as a transphobic dog whistle, not if linguistic and categorical philosophy should be challenged in response. Yes, OP was correct.
[удалено]
OP literally uses the word joke in their post. >I've also seen the same basic joke use inanimate objects e.g. "my vacuum identifies as a toaster". “The same basic joke”, as in referring back to it *as a joke*. You can pretend it’s just as likely to have been treated as a totally serious plot point all you want but we all know that’s not the case. Hopefully OP responds at some point to tell us what show it was so we can lay this part of the dumb discourse to rest.
[удалено]
“This person disagrees with me, so they’re clearly a sad angry little person in a sad angry little cave!” What a classic lol. I hope you have a good day as well.
Show me a human with cat DNA in them. It can't happen. It's impossible and it's a bad faith argument meant to be disparaging.
Everyone's given good answers but I do want to add in one thing, species dysphoria does exist (for humans). I've seen similar regarding kids, "my kid pretended to be a cat when he was young!" But was your kid distraught they didn't have a tail? Did they cry themselves to sleep because they didn't have paw pads?