In 2015, the Fortingall Yew, one of the oldest trees in Europe, decided trans rights are tree rights and switched its sex to female 🏳️⚧️ eat shit transphobes
Y'all ever undergo a sex change due to environmental stress?
No but a trans friend of mine is having environmental stress because of transphobes.
I'm cis and they give me environmental stress. "Dude, I'm just trying to order lunch. Why are you sharing these inside thoughts with me?"
I wouldn't trade it, but one bad thing about being an old white guy is assholes think I'm safe to unmask around, and Christ it skeeves me out. No, man, take those fucking thoughts to your grave.
Show this to republicans, or similar groups, and they’ll lose their shit and have a really bad day 😃
On a totally unrelated news the rest 50% of the US population supports ending global warming now.
🤓 Being trans has to do with gender identity, not sex. The whole foundation of transgenderism as a concept is that sex and gender identity are independent elements of a person. So as a corollary (I think, haven't used that word in a while lol), no non-sapient creature can ever be trans, because you need consciousness to have a gender identity in the first place.
if consciousness is imperative for gender. do sleeping people loose their gender?
Naptime is trans erasure 😔
everyone is agender atleast once a day /s
I think you could say part of one's identity exists outside of the person. Their self-identity should be respected and often will align with what they project outwards, but that's where people get confused about a person and then stubborn ones get fed up with the whole idea.
Anyway, in this case since the tree lacks sentience, it wouldn't have an internalized gender that we could know, but we can see that its sexual characteristics have changed and give it a transexual label. The trans label can cover both.
I think you could say part of one’s identity exists outside of the person.
That doesn't really make sense to me. It would imply that some part of who you are is defined by outside perception, and I definitely don't agree with that, especially considering that there are an indefinite number of outside perspectives, and some number of those perspectives could definitely be mutually exclusive with others, making it impossible for them both to be correct.
Simple analogy: if a triangle is viewed 'face-on' by one person and directly 'edge-on' by another, the former will perceive it as a triangle, and the latter, as a line. Something can't be a line and a triangle simultaneously, so how can these outside perspectives both be any part of what defines the identity of that object?
Okay but the tree is still trans.
Not so much.
Sex and gender are distinct elements. So whilst they're not the same thing, they do interact with each other and influence each other to some extent or another. If they didn't, then the world wouldn't be full of people whose gender and sex are in alignment. For that matter, if they didn't, we wouldn't even understand the concept of sex and gender being in alignment.
Also, "transgenderism" is a term popular with transphobes, because it frames trans people as a belief/ideology, rather than acknowledging their identity.
no non-sapient creature can ever be trans, because you need consciousness to have a gender identity in the first place.
But for all of that, strictly speaking, this is true.
Also, “transgenderism” is a term popular with transphobes, because it frames trans people as a belief/ideology, rather than acknowledging their identity.
What am I supposed to call it, when talking about this as a concept, outside of referring to a specific person. Transgendericity? Transgenderology?
Throw me a bone here, don't just insinuate I'm a transphobe just because I casually tossed 'ism' onto the end of a word to noun-ify it in a sentence, without even offering a correction.
People have no idea what is or isn't natural. A lot of animals and plants change sex due to various factors during their life.
It's the same idiots who said being gay is unnatural, completely ignoring the multitude of gay animals.
That's basically the plot of Jurassic Park.
Hey, I think this is highly toxic!
;-)
Hue hue hue
Every part of the plant except the "berry" (it isn't berry) is toxic.
I want to try eating it but I heard that it isn't that good.
Many plants have both sexes at the same time, it is not uncommon. And some plants change sex under some circumstances, e.g. Papaya trees can do that
"Is it possible to learn this power?"
"Not from a conservative"
Well, plants really don't have to deal with our binary bullshit. Most of them don't have any sex because they have perfect flowers anyways, meaning their flowers have male and female gametes.
I was today old when I found out a yew is an evergreen and that I grew up around them (because I remember squishing those berries as a kid). Because they have needles I thought they were some kind of hemlock, and I had it in my head that yew leaves looked something like a willow's.