3 ms·

Its interesting to see the parallels between this and the subreddit r/blackpeopletwitter, which began requiring users to verify with mods that they pass the "pa

Its interesting to see the parallels between this and the subreddit r/blackpeopletwitter, which began requiring users to verify with mods that they pass the "paper bag test" in order to participate on the forum. Even the rationality for doing so sounds exactly like this quote from the article regarding Giggle, simply replacing "black people" with "women": > "We wanted a place where women could go to help each other," she said in an email. "A female space, in the palm of their hand. Where women could find support, connection and a refuge amongst other women no matter where they were or what they were doing." And yet the reaction to the two seems to be divergent. We've clearly stopped caring for eliminating discrimination and now are hellbent on fostering discrimination, so long as its discriminating against the "right" groups. Hard to keep up with what groups are "right" to discriminate against on any particular day, though. Seems like a race to the bottom to me.

justinpowers 5y ago
“Once we’re all at the bottom, then we’re all on equal footing. And effectively, relatively, socially, there no longer is a bottom or top.” - A Smirking Philosopher
jfengel 5y ago
Ending discrimination is great, but that's not happening today. And today, people need to cope with discrimination. Which sometimes means singling out people who are discriminated against, using the same criteria that the discriminators use. Trans women face discrimination in many of the same ways that cis women do, and in most circumstances it's best to simply treat them as women. There are a somewhat-nebulous set of cases that should be restricted to cis women, but much of the time those cases are more about anti-trans-discrimination than actually protecting cis women in particular. Any case of discrimination for the benefit of marginalized groups is going to invite scrutiny, and sometimes legitimate disagreement. It sounds to me like this case is reasonable to exclude men, but not to exclude trans women. The fact that they don't menstruate, for example, doesn't mark them as non-women: lots of women don't menstruate (young, old, ill, athletes, anorexics, etc.) It's true that many lacked girlhoods, but increasingly many have transitioned at a young age. That's my cursory opinion. It could change if I were exposed to more details. But I don't consider it helpful to say "to end discrimination we should stop letting people self-segregate". That attitude fosters abuse by people who discriminate, and forbids people from protecting themselves against it. Maybe in the future it will be helpful, but today it harms a lot of people.

justinpowers 5y ago

“Once we’re all at the bottom, then we’re all on equal footing. And effectively, relatively, socially, there no longer is a bottom or top.” - A Smirking Philosopher

jfengel 5y ago

Ending discrimination is great, but that's not happening today. And today, people need to cope with discrimination. Which sometimes means singling out people who are discriminated against, using the same criteria that the discriminators use. Trans women face discrimination in many of the same ways that cis women do, and in most circumstances it's best to simply treat them as women. There are a somewhat-nebulous set of cases that should be restricted to cis women, but much of the time those cases are more about anti-trans-discrimination than actually protecting cis women in particular. Any case of discrimination for the benefit of marginalized groups is going to invite scrutiny, and sometimes legitimate disagreement. It sounds to me like this case is reasonable to exclude men, but not to exclude trans women. The fact that they don't menstruate, for example, doesn't mark them as non-women: lots of women don't menstruate (young, old, ill, athletes, anorexics, etc.) It's true that many lacked girlhoods, but increasingly many have transitioned at a young age. That's my cursory opinion. It could change if I were exposed to more details. But I don't consider it helpful to say "to end discrimination we should stop letting people self-segregate". That attitude fosters abuse by people who discriminate, and forbids people from protecting themselves against it. Maybe in the future it will be helpful, but today it harms a lot of people.