3 ms·
Having a good deal of familiarity with the sort of people you are talking about, I'd say that your understanding is almost exactly the opposite of the case. It
by astine 10y ago
Having a good deal of familiarity with the sort of people you are talking about, I'd say that your understanding is almost exactly the opposite of the case. It depends a little on exactly which group of Kansas fundamentalists you are talking about, but the standard view is that things gayness or transexuality are not biological identities but character flaws. There is a common belief that homosexuality is a side effect sexual license. Much of the importance of a gay 'identity' or a transexual 'identity' is in reaction to just this attitude. Homosexuals find the need to emphasize that their homosexuality is inbuilt and not some moral failing and so turn it into an identity.
- foldr 10y agoSo they are actually fine with transwomen using the women's restroom? I'm not quite sure which part you're disputing.
- astine 10y agoIt's this statement here that I disagree with: "The people who think it's most important of all are the people who disapprove of it." Social conservatives don't want transwomen using the women's bathrooms because they don't think that they are actually women. That's the only distinction that they care about: biological sex. Everything else is fiction to them. Bear in mind that this is a simplification of the stances of millions of people, all of whom are different. Some will more readily admit to the existence of transpeople and homosexuals.
- foldr 10y agoI'm not sure where we disagree. As you say, conservatives think that the difference between cis women and transwomen is very important, as they believe that transwomen are not really women.