This person looks like a man, agreed?
If you are an advocate of transgenderism then this is plain stereotyping. If you believe that gender is not based on physical attributes then this person cannot be defined based on just this photo right?
But we can all agree that this person would pass for male in society?
Why?
Is it because men and woman have significant and obvious physical differences, that, without the intervention of modern science would be plain to see by anyone.
Pretty much.
Clearly the article states that this person is a trans man, and in all honesty, meeting Laith Ashley without knowledge of this, I would say the vast majority would assume Laith to be male. Is this wrong? Should we not assume Laith to be male? Should we still ask the pronouns before using one? Would this be considered misgendering Laith, or at least questioning what they may assume to be an obvious gender definition.
What I'm saying is, if I meet Laith for the first time with absolutely no knowledge of their biological sex or gender and I choose to ask them what pronouns they prefer, I honestly feel like I would offend them. For they clearly present as male, even as a avid transkeptic, this is true.
This is because Ashley 'passes' for male. And this is language I've picked up on the other side of the debate. Why does Ashley 'pass' for male? Haircut? Muscle build? Jawline?
We all know why, we all see it the second we look at him, as we do the second we look at any stranger in the street. Regardless of dress, makeup, age or race we all can determine the sex of a person at first glance, we dont even consciously make this definition, its like trying not to read a word in your language, you simple can't not understand it.
These physical definitions are real, they define and separate sex absolutely. But reader, I know what you're thinking. And this is where it gets good. Laith Ashley is biologically female and yet I admit I could not distinguish them from male at sight.
So we need to get this out the way. I have brown hair. If I dye it blonde my entire life it will still not make me a natural blonde. I may be considered to 'be blonde' by everyone that knows me, but it will never be a fact. Without intervention from modern technology, I would simply revert to being brunette.
As with Ashley, without the intervention of hormone therapy, the male appearance will simply diminish.
But, I hear you say, if this were the case, it would make him no less male if he appeared female.
So why go through it. If you are just as male in your natural body as you are with hormone replacement, why do it? If you know you are a man, then you're a man, why change anything?
I feel like trans people themselves are perpetuating the 'myth' that male and female have physical differences. By changing your body to suit what society sees as male and female you're actually encouraging the gender separation. Gender is not physical sex right?
This has been a bit of ramble I admit, I will try and formulate a bit more coherency for my next post which will be about the hypocrisy between sexuality and gender, for which I was going to use the above photo.
As always, as much as I welcome debate, I do not tolerate trolling or abuse. I would never do it to anyone else, I absolutely respect everybody's right to their own opinions on their own page. This is mine and I hope that you would either debate me in a respectful and adult manner, or move on. We all have a right to express our views.
Hope you're all managing the lockdown ok.
Lassie x
