3 ms·
Have you considered that forcing the abnormal to be included with the normal renders both terms meaningless?
by beerandt 5y ago
Have you considered that forcing the abnormal to be included with the normal renders both terms meaningless?
- crooked-v 5y agoThis categorization scheme would specifically include the 'abnormal' and the 'normal' together based entirely on chromosomes.
- cudgy 5y agoNo matter what classification is used, there will be variations. However, using a deterministic criteria reduces incentive to game the system. More importantly, it reduces (for example) the pressure on participants to change their sexual identity to improve their competition level in a sport or at the least give the impression that the change was made for competitive reasons.
- beerandt 5y agoMy point is that if something is "different" , forcing others to label that thing as "not-different" isn't a productive battle. Others will just now need a new way to describe it, because to them, the original label is now meaningless in it's classic sense, to them. For example we've gone from: (some male terms I apparently can't use anymore) to transwoman to ciswoman to biological woman. And in every case the transwomen demands to be included in the "new" category, and everyone else has to come up with another term to differentiate.