I don’t think he is trying to demean the actual marginalized groups. He just points at the inconsistencies of the predominant social framework. Arguments for “s

I don’t think he is trying to demean the actual marginalized groups. He just points at the inconsistencies of the predominant social framework. Arguments for “social justice” (for lack of a better term) often aren’t logical or consistent, and maybe they can never be, because human nature just isn’t that way, which is not even to say that there is anything inherently wrong with that, but it should be scrutinized and one should be aware of it. There are countless examples of this in the replies to Dawkins’ tweet alone. Someone literally says that transracialism is invalid because, unlike gender, race isn’t a spectrum. That seems completely wrong to me and even if “race” (as a German I’ve always found this word’s fashionability pretty weird btw) were descrete, what about that precludes transracialism? Others focus on the aspect of choice, with some implying that the specific woman in question “chose” to be transracial, while transgender people are inherently transgender. Does this mean someone claiming to have been born in the wrong skin color would not get vilified? And again, what makes this the deciding factor? I remember this was a huge point in favor of gay rights as well. Why? I suppose because it’s easily defensible and somehow worked in the discourse at the time, but we should be so honest with ourselves as not to conflate auch tactical manouvers with actual foundations of our beliefs. Some people focus on the privilege aspect, alleging the transracial woman only posed as black to gain some benefits afforded to black people. Yet the same doesn’t seem to apply to MTF transwomen. I’m not going for a “gotcha, checkmate sjws” here and it’s sad it has to be said. Obviously, presumably like Dawkins himself, I’m all for social liberties. I don’t care what other people do with their bodies and I shouldn’t regulate it. I consider myself on the side of “the left” if you will, and that’s the only reason I cringe so hard at it. The right wing trolls under Dawkins’ tweet are deplorable, but they don’t affect me as much and generally don’t intersect with my bubble a lot. They don’t feel very powerful to me, so even ridiculing them seems pretty self congratulatory. Dawkins is challenging social justice like he challanged christianity 20 years ago: because they are dominant and wrongly feel infallible. It’s just more sad having to do it to what you consider your own camp, and being vilified by them.