Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-25951143-20150101110046/@comment-25814498-20151002232058

Viviburn wrote: DinoTaur wrote: You know, I was literally just asking for examples. I had every intention of agreeing with you if you could provide the appropriate examples. However, what you have just called as transphobic is actually being objective, if you really want, apathetic, but definitely not hate. I know, the opposite of love is indifference/apathy, but as a wiki, we cannot afford to "love". If something was said like, "Alluka can't be transsexual because it would be weird," that would be closer to transphobic. And no, we are not equating gender with sex, we just choose to use sex as our representative. Now, maybe we could change the infobox from saying gender to sex so it would be more accurate in your eyes. I don't know if it can be done, I'm not an admin here, and it would take A LOT of work. OK, that's the problem right here! "we just choose to use sex as our representative."

Do you see what's wrong here? On a discussion about gender, sex shouldn't be used as evidence one way or another unless you're willing to go into evidence that the character is cis, trans, non-binary, etc. That's being cisnormative, and while usually it's not a conscious decision or an actively hateful comment, it's still transphobic. Am I calling the person who said it transphobic? Probably not, unless they'll repeatably make these comments even after being called out on it. I'm saying the comments themselves are transphobic. It's still an aversion to labelling someone as anything but cis. To default to matching gender and sex is transphobic. To default to matching gender and sex harms people who aren't safe or comfortable with how other people identify them. It makes people feel broken for years because 'gender is sex' is all they ever knew growing up. This isn't a personal attack!! These are things that honestly the majority of people haven't heard or don't understand. That's why I'm trying to explain it! This is what we've had problems with.

BUT this is far from the point I'm currently trying to make! I keep bringing up new evidence, but all anyone wants to talk about are things that happened months ago. Instead of focusing on some old, childish, harmful, and occasionally off-kilter comments, we should discuss the actual topic and maybe even work together to examine the Japanese text of the manga, such as the passage I last posted. Is that reasonable?

Cheers. I mean, we could just change all of the info boxes on every character from "gender" to "sex". That way there's no misinterpritation and we're just giving official confirmations. Then again, I guess that'd still bring the issue of a fictional, not real, non existant person having their feelings broken because they're not receiving the proper pronouns. Even though they're not real.