4 ms·

Trans peoples existence certainly has been politicized. In many cases they are de facto not allowed to exist. > Except unborn children, whose very existence T

Trans peoples existence certainly has been politicized. In many cases they are de facto not allowed to exist. > Except unborn children, whose very existence To use your same disingenuous measure of argument, no their existence isn't politicized, whether or not they are "persons" (or alive) is. Fetuses quite obviously exist, everyone agrees on that. The HN guidelines suggest you steelman the arguments of people who you respond to. I don't think you're doing that if your entire argument boils down to a weak rhetorical disagreement about how precisely to define "very existence". Since certain forms of discriminatory policy are politicizing people's very existence. I also don't think people ever widely suggested Muslim people's existence had been politicized, so that's simply a strawperson.

JamesBarney 6y ago
Im pro choice and think the banning of gender reassignment in children is bad. But you're arguing that deciding whether or not a fetus or unborn child is a person is not an existential issue, but when someone can choose to get gender reassignment is. One is very literally an argument about personhood and the right to terminate and the other is about children's and parents right to choose appropriate medical care.
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  I'm not. I'm arguing that they're the same situation. I think there are other factors that make the issue of gender reassignment completely unlike abortion, but yes they're both existential. GP was claiming only abortion was and I pointed out that that was logically inconsistent. The differences are that regulating abortion harms a third party, the woman, while allowing gender reassignment doesn't.
bob_roberts 6y ago
> Trans peoples existence certainly has been politicized To expand on this - If a trans person has a coworker who consistent and deliberately mis-genders them, there's no way for the person to have a discussion about it that's not political.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- hnbad 6y ago
  Even simpler: if the existence of trans, let alone non-binary, people is a contentious issue in politics, there's no way for a non-binary (or GNC binary trans) person to state their pronouns without it being a political act. The same is true for people in same-sex relationships. You can't just mention your spouse like a straight person would without it being political.

JamesBarney 6y ago

Im pro choice and think the banning of gender reassignment in children is bad. But you're arguing that deciding whether or not a fetus or unborn child is a person is not an existential issue, but when someone can choose to get gender reassignment is. One is very literally an argument about personhood and the right to terminate and the other is about children's and parents right to choose appropriate medical care.

joshuamorton 6y ago
I'm not. I'm arguing that they're the same situation. I think there are other factors that make the issue of gender reassignment completely unlike abortion, but yes they're both existential. GP was claiming only abortion was and I pointed out that that was logically inconsistent. The differences are that regulating abortion harms a third party, the woman, while allowing gender reassignment doesn't.

bob_roberts 6y ago

> Trans peoples existence certainly has been politicized To expand on this - If a trans person has a coworker who consistent and deliberately mis-genders them, there's no way for the person to have a discussion about it that's not political.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
hnbad 6y ago
Even simpler: if the existence of trans, let alone non-binary, people is a contentious issue in politics, there's no way for a non-binary (or GNC binary trans) person to state their pronouns without it being a political act. The same is true for people in same-sex relationships. You can't just mention your spouse like a straight person would without it being political.