Anonymous #1 21h

😑 Okay, couple of notes: 1) It doesn’t say “being genocided”, it says “about to”. 2) That is a reasonable concern for trans people to have based on actions of the Trump administration and the GOP at large.

11

Anonymous #1 21h

surely you’ll excuse us for not taking your word for it as our passports are being revoked and, in certain states, licenses and ability to attain employment.

9

Anonymous #3 21h

Genocide is when passports are revoked?

1

Anonymous #1 21h

also, the NSPM-7??? who do you think they’re going to target under “radical gender extremism”? some politicians and political pundits openly classify us as such already…

3

Anonymous #1 21h

did I say that, or are you avoiding the point as much as possible?

13

Anonymous #3 21h

Did you not just list that as an example

0

Anonymous #2 21h

Do people just not read shit anymore before they reply? Again, “about to” is a very different timeline than “is currently happening”. And based on how things are going that’s a valid concern. This is also a bad comparison because not all genocides follow the same mechanical template. Gaza looks different from the Holocaust looked different from Native American genocide. That’s a patently unreasonable standard.

1

Anonymous #3 21h

It’s fair to say that the trans humanity is being oppressed

-1

Anonymous #1 21h

as an example of systemic targeting in support of OP’s point of larger targeting and potential genocide gearing up. the picture I added was to further cement the point as the lemkin institute is directly dedicated towards the analysis and prevention of genocide, and their conclusion also supports OP’s argument. lastly, passports are not the only thing I mentioned. the NSPM-7 relates to the FBI’s investigation of what they deem “domestic terrorism”.

2

Anonymous #1 21h

I think the underlying point is not that it’s an active genocide in the same sense as the Palestinian genocide, but that there’s active systemic discrimination and oppression, and that it’s actively growing day by day, with more forms of oppression and with a risk of becoming far more violent than it already is yk? I appreciate you acknowledging the oppression though, there’s some people on here who try to entirely deny that :(

0

Anonymous #3 21h

So why not just say there is discrimination and oppression? It feels like saying that isn’t enough so people have to keep pushing on what it “ could be one day” There seems to be only downsides when making statements like that

0

Anonymous #3 21h

but amethyst makes a vital point down below too. I’d personally consider it a genocide in its early days, but also there’s a long and deep-rooted history of systemic oppression against the community so it’s quite a complex and painful topic yk

1

Anonymous #1 20h

I mean just based off the UN definition I’d consider it as such, but I think many instances of intended genocide aren’t classified as such due to a subconscious comparison of events if that makes sense for example that happens a lot with denialists of the Palestinian genocide: they’ll claim it isn’t one because they perceive it as not as severe as the holocaust, or the Rwandan genocide, etc., or they’ll cite the birth rates or something (idk); but I primarily consider intention

3

Anonymous #3 20h

i said this in another comment but if you want to capture the severity without the semantic issues call it a crime against humanity—the UN’s term for stuff like this that isn’t necessarily just against national, racial, ethnic, and religious groups

1

Anonymous #3 20h

Which of those do you think applies to the trans community

0

Anonymous #1 20h

1-3 and 5 at the very least are all in full swing.

2

Anonymous #1 20h

all of them. The first three are a given, between the systemic targeting of our rights in society, the targeting of gender affirming care which has a documented effect of leading to an increase in suicide (meaning, a lack of gender affirming care is correlated to increased suicide rates), the continuous and vocalized dehumanization of our community, the legalization of conversion therapy and prisons utilized to test conversion therapy on trans inmates specifically, etc etc etc.

4

Anonymous #1 20h

I’d genuinely say all of them, which makes me even more depressed as i think through it😪

3

Anonymous #3 20h

bro somebody please read about crimes against humanity it is the accurate term based on the UN Rome Statute and captures the severity you’re trying to capture

7

Anonymous #4 20h

also all of the actions of genocide fit under the crimes against humanity umbrella

7

Anonymous #4 20h

So does genocide. Genocide is an equally accurate word AND one that the average person actually understands, which means it’s frankly a better word to use this context.

3

Anonymous #4 20h

like amethyst perfectly explained, genocide is a crime against humanity… I don’t know what you intend to achieve by discrediting the claim of genocide by classifying the issues discussed as a crime against humanity, but not a genocide? like it’s both my friend

4

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 20h

One and two are definitely not in effect. Do you have any examples?

-1

Anonymous #3 20h

literally the only reason it’s not is because they’re not a national, racial, ethnic, or religious group and if you’re gonna go as specific to pull up the rome statute it implies you’re trying to go about exact definitions no? if you mean to describe the sorta kinda thing it is sure but don’t use the rome statute if you’re not using it

5

Anonymous #1 20h

two is easily the clearest article threatening the trans community- efforts to ban gender affirming care already fits

4

Anonymous #4 20h

then on top of that efforts to outlaw any recognition of people’s true gender identity also section 2

1

Anonymous #1 20h

I directly explained how. the revocation of healthcare documented to reduce suicide rates amongst the community -> resulting in an increase in suicide rates; the legalization of conversion therapy while directly and illegally testing said conversion therapy on trans prisoners against their will, the dehumanization of trans people throughout the US

4

Anonymous #4 20h

in all honesty I’d argue this is purely semantics. if the genocide convention covered sexual orientation, it would be classified as genocide. this is an instance of the existing definition being too limited in scope, due to the time in which it was drafted; rather than an instance of a lack of nefarious intentions and evidence. I’d agree with you regarding the technicality of our identities not being listed under the definition, but you do recognize how that’s essentially a cop-out, right?

2

Anonymous #4 20h

like in all honesty, all that limitation does is allow for denialism. in other words, if the listed demographics included “sexual orientation, gender identity, …”, would you consider us at risk of genocide? (I forgot to include gender identity in my previous comment oh my godddd my bad lol)

3

Anonymous #3 20h

but there already is a term that includes queer people literally on the same level in terms of scope and severity as genocide it’s not denial in any form to say it’s a crime against humanity, you can have a crime against humanity more severe than something classified as genocide so i don’t see how it’s a cop out at all

-1

Anonymous #4 20h

using the more accurate term doesn’t change the severity of the thing you’re describing. the word doesn’t change the event the event changes which word you use

-1

Anonymous #1 20h

You’re seriously gonna stand here and tell me you don’t think trans people are getting subjected to murder and violent assault for being trans? And that the U.S. government isn’t participating in it through things like v-coding and DHS profiling?

5

Anonymous #4 20h

like my question would be why does it have to be genocide to validate the current threat?

-1

Anonymous #4 20h

It doesn’t have to be genocide to “validate” the threat, but it DOES have to be genocide to communicate effectively about the threat. The average layperson doesn’t know or care what the legal definition of a “crime against humanity” is, but they both understand and have an appropriate mental response to genocide. Why do you insist on muddying those waters?

2

Anonymous #4 20h

Crime against humanity isn’t even “the more accurate term”. If I’m being generous, they’re equally accurate; in reality, “genocide” is the more accurate term because it’s more specific.

6

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 20h

well the waters are already muddy here but what you’re saying makes sense just know genocide is a term so loaded with historical precedent people often draw question to its usage so using it just to communicate severity makes sense but when and if ever you need to get down to nitty gritty of accuracy and definition crimes against humanity is probably the way to go

0

Anonymous #4 20h

like I asked earlier. if sexual orientation and gender identity were included in the definition of genocide by the UN, would you agree with us and classify it as such, or at least the early stages?

1

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 20h

see and this is where yall are losing me because you can’t talk about specifics when it specifically doesn’t include gender sexual minorities in the definition just don’t use the rome statute is all i’m saying 😭

-1

Anonymous #4 20h

I’m not using the Rome statute, you are and I’m criticizing you for it.

4

Anonymous #3 20h

well yeah i already said section two of article one can easily describe the current threats to trans people

1

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 20h

hold on in that case there are different arguments going on but with what you’re saying of just use genocide because it’s what will make sense to people makes sense to me

8

Anonymous #1 19h

You don’t find anything concerning about trans people being banned from leaving the country? Damn you need to read some German history.

11

Anonymous #1 15h

Do you think murdering people in the streets is step one for a genocide?

9

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 14h

Murders in the streets? Where’s that happening

0

Anonymous #1 14h

Not what I said.

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 14h

Oh I thought you were going to make a point my bad

0

Anonymous #1 14h

You didn’t answer my question.

1

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 14h

I wouldn’t say that’s step one, nor have I alluded to that

0

Anonymous #1 14h

He did make a point, dingbat. We can be in the early stages of a genocide without getting packed up in the street on the day to day (which is still way more common than for cis people anyway but that’s not the point)

5

Anonymous #1 14h

yeah I’m sorry but it kinda flew over your head a bit, it happens🤷 these things commonly build over the course of decades, and begin with very subtle changes in societal norms and regressions (or revocations) of civil rights or protections

1

Anonymous amethyst_headphone51 14h

Do you think we are in the early stages of a Christian genocide in america? (I want to preface that I am not religious) But if we’re loosening the definition that much, church shootings/violence and social pressure could fit too and they’re a religious majority. I think opening that up would only hurt the trans community in the long run. You honestly could make the point for fat people as well

1

Anonymous #1 14h

genocide is organized and institutional not individual acts of violence so no

11

Anonymous #4 14h

The trans community is neither a national, ethnical, racial or religious group

0

Anonymous #1 14h

Genocide only necessitates a common group identity, which a gender expression can fall under.

5

Anonymous #1 14h

idk if you read that entire conversation up there but people use genocide because it’s the term people understand as widespread effort to destroy a collective identity but if we’re being specific about it yeah it’s a crime against severity which is an international crime of the same severity

5

Anonymous ireallylikepancakes 14h

According to who

1

Anonymous #1 14h

Mainly the people committing the genocide, honestly.

1