4 ms·

> Recognizing that trans women are women and trans men are men? 100% that’s the bare minimum and I am happy to see it. If women are a group historically discri

> Recognizing that trans women are women and trans men are men? 100% that’s the bare minimum and I am happy to see it. If women are a group historically discriminated against by virtue of their sex (female, different physicality, different reproductive role) rather than by their gender (feminine, caring, pretty, submissive, domestic, …) then is the fusing of sex and gender truly progressive? Is it medically, scientifically or philosophically true to assert TWAW, or is it a well-intentioned social fiction? Like you, I believe there’s much to be commended in “woke” (including the full acceptance of people who wish to live as if they were the other sex, or of no sex) but I think the mechanism (identity politics, intersectionality) and the philosophy (postmodernist) are unhelpful and irrational.

wolverine876 5y ago
> If women are a group historically discriminated against by virtue of their sex (female, different physicality, different reproductive role) rather than by their gender (feminine, caring, pretty, submissive, domestic, …) Are they? And is that the definition of gender? submissive?! It's hard to think of someone I know now, who identifies as female, who fits your definition. And if true, what does some historical discrimination have to do with someone's personal belief of themselves? If I think I'm non-binary, does the historical reason for discrimination against women change me somehow? And who are you or I to tell someone else what their identity is? That just seems bizarre to me. > postmodernist Ironically, most people criticizing post-moderinism are using it as the mechanism of their critique - which is especially post-modernist!
TaylorAlexander 5y ago
> then is the fusing of sex and gender truly progressive? Accepting trans people is about separating gender and sex, not fusing them.

wolverine876 5y ago

> If women are a group historically discriminated against by virtue of their sex (female, different physicality, different reproductive role) rather than by their gender (feminine, caring, pretty, submissive, domestic, …) Are they? And is that the definition of gender? submissive?! It's hard to think of someone I know now, who identifies as female, who fits your definition. And if true, what does some historical discrimination have to do with someone's personal belief of themselves? If I think I'm non-binary, does the historical reason for discrimination against women change me somehow? And who are you or I to tell someone else what their identity is? That just seems bizarre to me. > postmodernist Ironically, most people criticizing post-moderinism are using it as the mechanism of their critique - which is especially post-modernist!

TaylorAlexander 5y ago

> then is the fusing of sex and gender truly progressive? Accepting trans people is about separating gender and sex, not fusing them.