I know that for gay marriage and acceptance there’s been some studies that having gay characters in TV helped shape public perception. I think the study was around people watching Will and Grace and Modern Family and their acceptance of gay marriage.
It’s kind of beautiful that watching imaginary characters can make such a emotional impact since we bond with this “people”. That’s why representation on mass media is so important especially since most people won’t meet a trans person in real life since they are a small percentage of the population. Especially if they are talking about their own life.
I think brokeback mountain was good overall. It united us again cheaters instead of gays.
Funnily enough, meeting far-right people increased my far-right-ophobia.
Similarly, 20% of respondents who are personally close to a trans person agree that it’s never appropriate to discuss that some people are trans in public schools — a view that has been pushed by the anti-LGBTQ+ group Moms for Liberty and other so-called “parents’ rights” groups. That percentage rose to 41% among respondents who don’t know any transgender people.
Trans people must be very powerful, if the mere knowledge of their existence appears to be this dangerous to these ppl.
Can’t confirm, I’m very weak :(
spoiler
Maybe I should start working out
If I did a push up every time I thought about how I should be working out I’d be ripped.
I should really work out.
I’ll literally at Dairy Queen eating ice cream right now, while my gym across the street is looking on disappointed. I should really work out.
You can do it. Start small.
Yeah, sorry, I believe those mythical powers only exist in the minds of small-minded people, but I think you are awesome and you’re doing enough!
Though this ⇡ cis guy should also really start working out :p
Trans people must be very powerful, if the mere knowledge of their existence appears to be this dangerous to these ppl.
Aye. Knowing about the existence of trans people might cause a person to query a whole bunch of stuff about gender, and from that they might come to query many other norms and constructs.
Which to a conservative is about as threatening as it can possibly get. Or rather, the increased awareness in the general population that results from querying things is, and how that population might shape society in response. People who derive a sense of security and well-being from clearly defined roles and rules and hierarchies, even if those are enforced harshly against them, don’t only fear that instability and worse conditions could come in the wake of major socio-political reforms - they fear it as an existential threat because without those clear roles & rules, etc., how will they themselves know how to be?
Though for the most part they’re only having this grotesque hate-tantrum because their corporate overlords prefer it when they’re distracted and emotional, and trans people are a particularly tiny minority to direct their attention at.
I interpret this as that it’s to protect their trans friends, treat them like human beings, and let them come out when they’re ready and feel safe. It’s unfortunate that conservatives want to put their hands in the pants of trans folk though.
I believe the question was about whether schools should teach about or mention the existence of trans people, not whether schools should out closeted trans people.
Ah, in that case it’s horrifying.
Trans folks are such a small sliver of the population, it’s very difficult for most people to know a trans person.
On top of this, many trans people try to live “stealth” so they’re not harassed for simply existing.
It’s sad, because this is a known phenomenon. It’s the “why” of why LGB acceptance has grown in the last several decades, it turns out when friends and loved ones are lesbian, gay, or bisexual, it becomes something people are more willing to accept.
LGB is about 3.5% of the population while T is about 0.3%.
It’s so much harder for people to meet a trans person to begin with, just based on numbers. This puts trans people at a natural disadvantage in being able to grow acceptance in society.
Now this is where I put on my tinfoil fucking hat.
I feel like conservatives chose trans people as a target because they know this, too. They know the small numbers mean acceptance will be an even slower and harder road than for the LGB part of the community. They’re fucking banking on it, so they can continue to sew division and hate.
If you’re talking about the US, those figures are out of date 1 2 3
Also a little over 4 in 10 Americans say they personally know a trans person
Neat, but the question is: Are there more openly LGBTQ+ people because their numbers are simply growing, or is it a function of society becoming more accepting, so fewer feel a reason to hide it most of their lives? (my bet is on the latter)
Secondly, even with the increase in trans population, you’re still looking at a way smaller T community than LGB, which still makes acceptance an uphill battle for trans identities.
It’s definitely the latter, the common analogy is to left-handedness and acceptance. Anyone who works in queer health or population health is very familiar with stigmatization vs. identification and under-reporting issues.
Yoooo, didn’t you use to be active on /r/CenturyClub? I recognise your username, though I wouldn’t expect you to remember mine.
long time ago, yes. bbhh
I feel like conservatives chose trans people as a target because they know this, too. They know the small numbers mean acceptance will be an even slower and harder road than for the LGB part of the community. They’re fucking banking on it, so they can continue to sew division and hate.
I’m sure this was a deliberate choice since they lost on gay acceptance. They are using the same techniques and talking points as well. It’s also backlash since there was more acceptance in some circles and had to jump on it before it became widespread since most people haven’t thought about it before. Got to get that indoctrination in first or else it won’t stick
Very much on point, and this is where the age-old tension between “a duty to come out” versus “a right to choose if and when” remains still relevant.
I do not want to take the position that there is such a duty, but I have to admit that I’m uneasy that our 2010s-present queer media does not even acknowledge the tension.
I think we should normalize referring to people who are straight but haven’t explicitly told people they’re straight as not having “come out” as straight. It’s a heteronormative bias. If anything we actually don’t know if they’re straight. More importantly, I think it helps illustrate the bizarre nature of the “duty to come out” as you call it.
Jfc this one drives me nuts.
Number of times I’ve been party to conversations where the prevailing attitude was that because someone didn’t announce themselves as gay, then they couldn’t possibly be gay.
“Were you talking about sexuality at any point?”
“Had they been attracting the interest of the opposite sex, or same sex for that matter?”
“Was there any conversation or non-verbal interaction where their sexuality might have been vaguely relevant?”
“Did you declare your own sexuality to them?”
“Yeah, but that’s different!”
Fuckers never can explain what they think is different about it, funnily enough.
See also: straight people getting in a lather because a gay person is flirting with someone of the opposite sex.
Re: tinfoil hat,
It wouldn’t surprise me. They did this with abortion rights. The American right used the topic to scare the evangelicals into becoming an ally. “Pro life” and all the rhetoric around calling abortion murder is nothing short of marketing genius. (Evil genius.) How can you even begin to respond to it? You can tell them that abortion isn’t murder until you’re blue in the face and even if you convince someone all they have to do is find folks on the fence and tell them “the left is murdering babies” and they’re on board. It’s so direct. Why would you want to side with the “baby murderers”? More importantly, why would you miss an election? The left are “murderers” sent by “demons” and will take office if you don’t act.
Plus, sexuality is really apparent when you see couples; two guys who are together are clearly not straight - you don’t need to get to know either of them to know that.
However, the point for most trans people is that they want to pass, and just live as the gender that corresponds to their gender identity. If they pass it’s just not apparent they’re trans until you get to know them - even leaving the stealth aspect aside.
I met trans folk in high school and that’s all it took to push me out of a massive billion dollar cult.
Based on the wording you used, I think I know which cult you might be referring to. Yes there are several cults with that valuation to choose from, but my guess would have to be the US American frontier real-estate sex cult. It’s not really important but I just get a kick out of finding another refugee in the wild.
For me, all it took was a few episodes of Carl Sagans Cosmos series on our grainy black and white tv late on Sunday evening. I didn’t meet any “out” sexual minorities of any kind till college but being introduced to the scientific world view really gave me something to hold on to during the worst years growing up queer.
You never know what kind of influence your example can have. Glob bless Fred Rogers and Carl Sagan, otherwise I’d have had no examples of acceptance and openness.
That’s the one!
I was a good boy scout and the church had me putting up prop 8 signs all over the neighborhood in southern california. I had no idea what they were, something about people getting married which seems in consequential to me but that’s how I earned my allowance.
When I showed up to school that week one of the people in our friend group had a bunch of them and was tearing them up. When they noticed my irritation they told me the prop was to stop them from getting married which seemed backwards. Sure enough, that’s what the law was and then I wanted to become a lawyer to stop that insufferable shit.
I never became a lawyer, I work with lawyers more than enough.
That’s logical in retrospect, isn’t it?
I let out an audible “no shit” when reading the headline, but I guess it’s important to demonstrate even obvious relationships
No, it’s not obvious. There are plenty of bigots who maintain their bigotry even whike knowing people their bigoted against.
Sadly have seen it myself. When talking to an ex-friend, they unloaded about trans people being sick delusional groomers. When I said that they would change their mind if they knew any transgender people, they responded that they did have a trans friend. I responded “then you should let them know what you really think of them and see if they’re still your friend tomorrow.” Hung up, blocked their number. I hope that trans friend is doing alright. Fuck transphobia.
Are you sure they have a trans friend?
A lot of bigots I find tend to have no problem with lying or making stuff up too
I don’t know and don’t care enough to find out. I’m happier with them gone from my life.
It’s another example of the effect of meeting people from X demographic making you more tolerant of X demographic. It’s good to have lots of real and concrete examples of known effects to prove that the effect is indeed real and still applies in the modern day. “Look, it’s not just a hypothesis, here is it actually happening! Several examples so you know it’s not a fluke! Something recent so you know a culture shift or whatever hasn’t neutered it!”
I learned about this effect through reading stuff on the internet when I was young. It might be some other 10-year-old onlooker’s first intro to it.
This is the biggest issue in our country tbh, there’s a reason rural people are more bigoted and it’s because they don’t see LGTBQ+/other races/anyone different at all in their tiny world, and not knowing creates fear.
Living in cities you’re constantly surrounded by so many people that you just ignore everyone, and for the most part are just “let everyone do their own thing”. People really need to step out of their comfort zones.
PBS programs like Sesame Street were the only exposure I had to non-white cultures as a young kid as the city population where I went to schoole at the time was in the upper 90% white range and I mostly hung out with other rural kids because of proximity. A show with people just doing people things was a great way to normalize diversity.
Or at least allow other people to do their thing.
I’m happy in my comfort zone, and am probably the last person to try something new. I’m not interested in leaving my comfort zone. I’m also not about to rip other people out of their comfort zone and harass them. Last time I checked, someone else eating food I never would or being trans when I’m not is no threat to me and my own world. Why would I ever try to threaten theirs?
Eh I’d still suggest it. I won’t force people to but generally it’s good to get out and try new things. You don’t have to like them, but truly we get one life and you don’t want to make it to the end and realize you didn’t try anything. I like my rut too, but I still try to travel, experience new cultures, try that weird new food, talk to someone who’s different from me, go to that risque show that I normally wouldn’t, those are all life experiences that we can only do for so long and then it’s just over.
We go to work and follow our routine every day, a couple times a year try to push the boundaries a bit, you never know what you may like that’s out there
I don’t know. I’m terrified of death but if I knew I would die tomorrow I would definitely NOT be thinking “I regret not trying more things.” I would do more of the same thing I’ve always loved to get as much known happiness before I die. Some people are just not wired that way. I don’t want anyone to feel pushed into trying new things or like they have to just because it’s what everyone else advocates for. As long as you’re able to tolerate those different from you, no problem. “Be open-minded” is really only required insofar as being tolerant, as realizing people who have different perspectives from you may still be good people. You need not be adventurous and into traveling and learning about different cultures and eating that new trendy food to be a decent human being. I’m happy where I am and not making anyone miserable, and I will defend my right to stay in my bubble so long as I don’t start becoming intolerant and mean.
The fact I’m autistic may factor into my perspective. But I don’t think it changes my point at all. My life, my choices, and while I get you’re probably well-intentioned and just want to improve my quality of life, because of my own personal history with this kind of perspective and being told similar things it feels somewhat pushy. There’s a decent chance it is not pushy in reality and it’s only my perception coloring things, especially since you did mention not trying to force anyone into things. If I want to try something new it will come from me choosing it, not about how I need to get out of my bubble or I specifically need to try it or I need to be more open-minded or most relevantly to this conversation, how I’ll regret not trying more things (implicitly, how I’ll regret being the person I am—someone who prefers to stay in their comfort zone).
I don’t think it is quite so simple. A lot of folks go to very rural areas because they’re mostly monocultured. Call it white flight I guess.
So put them on TV. Expose them that way. I myself am SUPER bitter about conservatives crying about “forced diversity” in media. I just want to shove it down their throats now. But representation is really really important. Just that my motives for it are based on resentment.
Americans who have a close personal relationship with someone who is transgender (a close friend, a family member, or they themselves are transgender) are generally comfortable with learning that a friend is transgender (62%). Americans who have an acquaintance who is transgender are similarly likely to say they would be comfortable learning a friend is transgender (57%). Around one-third of Americans who do not know anyone who is transgender (32%) say they would be comfortable learning that a friend is trans.
From the survey itself which the article linked to. https://www.prri.org/research/the-politics-of-gender-pronouns-and-public-education/
This poll seems to have managed to confirm that people who are not transphobic are in fact, probably not transphobic.
Amazing.
I went from trans-tolerant (“do what you want it’s none of my business”) to trans-supportive largely because of parasocial relationships with trans creators: PhilophyTube, ContraPoints, JessieGender, Jimquisition, Chipflake, Jammidodger, and NOAHFINCE. Then there’s nonbinary and trans-adjacent creators like Thought Slime (some kind of nonbinary?), CJ the X (nonbinary presentation?), Mother’s Basement (gf is Yazzie, trans woman), and Shaun (has entire hour long campaign videos about the BBC’s transphobia). Point being, knowing a trans person IRL is much less of barrier than you’d think since parasociality seems to cover it, and trans and trans-supportive creators have gotten a lot more open about being on the internet.
(yes NB is considered trans but 1. people don’t generally think of it that way and 2. I’m an AMAB demiboy and feel like that me being “trans” would appropriate the struggles of “real” trans people when my own identity is a “rounding error”, and to a large degree feel like gender nonconformity is less stigmatized than out-and-out binary trans people. I’m not transmedicalist, NB are still valid and may or may not want their own gender confirmation stuff, but feel like “trans” as a label is too broad an umbrella, since it basically covers all gender nonconformity)
I think I’m in the same boat. I remember having conversations with my wife around 2015 about being somewhat frustrated about trans people’s pronouns and wishing there was a better way to refer to them. I was very much in the “I don’t care what they do” mindset like you mentioned. Looking back is so wierd. At the time I sort of considered myself a libertarian but didn’t really get involved with politics. That changed so quickly with Trump (and specifically the United the Right rally). It really made me more politically aware. Anyways, like you I started watching ContraPoints. I think a friend recommended the “how to spot a fascist” video. It’s hard to say if her content really had any effect on me becoming more trans-supportive than trans-tolerant (like you said) or if it was just a natural progression for me mulling stuff over in my brain over time. I look back on that conversation now and cringe. It wasn’t outright transphobic but I’d definitely consider it a yellow flag hearing it from someone now.
deleted by creator
That is valid, thank you for your response. I want to offer a sincere apology for causing any discomfort; I misunderstood GNC as an umbrella term under which NB falls, similar to how “queer” is an umbrella term for LGBTQIA+ in general. Now I understand that GNC is more a lifestyle rather than an identity, and not a superset as I initially thought.
Regarding my own identity, I don’t outwardly present as GNC, but despite having masc pronouns, being referred to as a “man” makes my skin crawl, and I’m not fond of having facial hair. I don’t feel comfortable identifying as “trans”, and as a counterexample, that would suggest not all NB are trans and thus it isn’t a strict superset. However, this is just my personal experience and understanding, and I acknowledge that others might feel and experience their identities differently. I know there’s a diverse range of experiences and identities within the NB and trans communities, and it isn’t my place to define who should or should not identify as trans.
Also for what it’s worth, I’m not deeply engaged with NB communities, so my knowledge is lacking. Please correct me when I’ve used inappropriate language or expressed misunderstandings. I am here to learn and understand better. I appreciate your patience and willingness to correct my misunderstanding, and am glad I can be more sensitive and informed moving forward.
deleted by creator
This is absolutely a real and important effect, but we should bear in mind that this poll isn’t the thing proving it so it’s kind of a bad headline. In particular, the headline suggests that this is a new and tentative finding rather than something that’s been known for ages, and that it’s possible to disprove the effect by knocking down this survey. Intergroup contact theory actually goes back to the 50s and AFAICT is incredibly well-established.
To prove the effect exists with a survey like this, you would need to carefully disentangle the people who “don’t know any trans people” because they don’t know any trans people from the people who “don’t know any trans people” because all the trans people in their life are terrified of coming out to them. Conversely, you would need to carefully disentangle the people who “know a trans person” because they know someone who’s out to the world from the people who “know a trans person” because they know someone who’s out to only a very few people who they already had good reason to believe would be supportive. There are ways of doing this for people who are better at statistics and experiment design than me, and as I understand it there are studies which do it carefully and do prove the effect, but this isn’t one of them and doesn’t try to be. (And why should it try to be, when the effect’s existence has already been established and studied separately, and when the raw data on a large current sample is useful without reinventing the wheel?)
It’s so much deeper than that. For a lot of these *phobias, the concept of being friends with such a person is so foreign that merely reading a story about inter-group friendship has a measurable positive impact. See the below excerpt.
- Cernat, V. (2011). Extended Contact Effects: Is Exposure to Positive Outgroup Exemplars Sufficient or Is Interaction With Ingroup Members Necessary?. Journal Of Social Psychology, 151(6), 737-753. doi:10.1080/00224545.2010.522622
Participants who read a story about the friendship between a member of a stigmatized group and the member of another outgroup scored higher on outgroup admiration than a control group and felt less threatened by the prospect of interacting with a member of the target outgroup. However, reduction of outgroup disgust, negative stereotypes, biased beliefs, and anxiety was or tended to be highest among participants who read a story about the friendship between a member of a stigmatized group and an ingroup member. (p. 747)
Basically, it’s like these people have never imagined the target of their bias as someone who you COULD be friends with.
This is why they rail against college education so hard: because a collegiate education often requires you to study things like this, which in turn opens your mind to differing ideas. Which they screech about as “That liberal indoctrination stole my child from me!”
Not to mention in college you’re thrown in with thousands of people of all races, sexes, religions, and culture’s, and you are bound to be exposed to new ways of thinking. If you stay in your home town of 5000 people you never have to be exposed to other ways of thinking.
I’ve heard many formerly conservative peeps say something like that: Nobody indoctrinated me, I just met the people who were supposed to be othered and it turns out they are cool.
For the record: Same at schools - nobody is saying you gotta be gay or trans, but apparently just telling kids that different people exist is a threat to their indoctrinated lifestyle.
Exactly it, you go out into the world and realize everything that you’ve been told about people is just made up fearmongering. Turns out the vast vast majority of people want to wake up, go to work, go home, work out (but they’d rather not but they convince themselves to do it), go to the grocery store, and watch TV. Everyone truly just wants to have a boring happy life.
But you ask a conservative and they’ll claim they’re aiming to bring down america or some other crazy shit. Nope. They want to get a frozen pizza for dinner and watch whatever’s on TV, just like anyone else.
The regressive are working hard on eliminating quotas and content about minority groups so that their fragile followers don’t need to interact with or even acknowledge minority populations in colleges.
This is the reason regressive troglodytes have fixated on trans people. They are such a small portion of the population, that the vast majority of their base doesn’t know one, or anyone they do know is closeted.
It worked with gay people until we all decided to say fuck it and come out en masse anyway. They love making minorities miserable, because they can point to that misery and pretend it’s an innate condition of being that minority rather than the extensive ecosystem of oppression that they created to make us miserable.
So now that their gay Boogeyman is gone, they’ve moved on to trans people. If that stops working, they’ve got furries in their back pocket. It’s a never ending parade of hatred from the right.
no shit sherlock
Love this. I also suspect that the correlation/causation goes both ways: trans people are more likely going to tell a friend they’re trans if that person is not transphobic.
Though trans people being fairly uncommon is certainly an issue on this front as other people have pointed out, it’s quite nice to know that people have become more accepting by very nature of just knowing me
This sort of thing is great motivation for me to continue being out of the closet to the general public :)
Another group that even fewer people know personally or even know about are intersex people https://beehaw.org/comment/666904
Yeah damn I’m generally a socially anxious mess but like, if it helps…?
