This seems like one of those cases where the amount of heat coming off the subject is so large relative to the actual event, and the difference in arguments so

This seems like one of those cases where the amount of heat coming off the subject is so large relative to the actual event, and the difference in arguments so narrow, that there must be some deeper unspoken motivation. I don't believe the people making these arguments against Tuvel have chosen their position because of those arguments. I think there is some other political/power-oriented motivation, and the arguments are used instrumentally. Any thoughts on what that source motivation might be? I have some notions but I don't know this sphere in detail. --- Just speculating, one might think the academics want to avoid any change that would weaken the power the social justice race-guilt narrative has to control white men. They're afraid that if transracialism becomes accepted, whites will identify as non-whites to claim their privileges (e.g. affirmative action, argumentative deference, etc). Just imagine millions of white men identifying as mixed-race and then everyone having to accept that on pain of being called racists or transracialphobic. That's a nightmare scenario for the social justice crowd because it takes away their main permanent advantage in the culture wars: the ability to call people racist. But... that would seemingly also apply to transgenderism. So why the difference? Maybe transgenderism isn't considered a threat because identifying as a woman is too much of a jump for a normal man. A dude doesn't want to act like a woman, even if it helps him get hired at Intel. It would ruin his status and sexual appeal. You have to dress like a woman, and maybe even take hormones. It's just too weird. But simply identifying as mixed-race would be much easier for a man to do without changing any behavior or losing status. (Heck, I've met lots of white->black quasi-transracial kids from the suburbs who love gangsta rap... They're halfway there already.) At the same time, the academics may like transgenderism because it helps to weaken the public belief in traditional gender roles. It's perfect social constructionism: If everyone can be a man/woman, man/woman have no roles, no characteristics, nothing. Masculine and feminine become no more than fashion statements. Transracialism lacks this "advantage" because the notion of racial social roles was already rightly destroyed a long time ago. This feels like a rough thesis though.