4 ms·
You keep framing this issue as if it only affects trans people. The biological definition of man and woman is a category that's pretty relevant to everyone. An
by ramblerman 5y ago
You keep framing this issue as if it only affects trans people.
The biological definition of man and woman is a category that's pretty relevant to everyone. And pulling the rug out from under a biological concept, and then saying "Oh how strange that you all are thinking about this, it must only be because you are a transphobe, or a pervert" is an extremely disingenuous argument at best.
- swores 5y agoI asked a genuine question of why it matters so much to you (and explained that it was a genuine question because I dont feel it matters to me) and you haven't answered, instead you've just accused me of not caring about your view. Please enlighten me if there's a non-transphobic reason to care what pronounces my next door neighbour uses. And nobody is talking about pulling the rug from biological concepts - they're remaining the same regardless of what language we all use. "Male-born" and "penis-having" for example are (and I've no idea if these are the best / commonly accepted terms, this isn't an area I know much about) and I'm sure plenty of other related terms can still describe exact situations if you're wanting to think about someone's genitals while using their pronouns. But unless you're a doctor about to operate on me or somebody I want to have sex with, I probably don't care if you know what genitals I have or don't have nor do I understand why you'd think it important to know.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- daft_isnt_it 5y agoThere are many good reasons why one might want to refer to a person's biological sex in conversation. For example: "Why is that man being allowed to compete in a women's sporting event?" "Why is that man flashing his penis in the women-only area of the nude spa?" "Why is that man calling himself a lesbian and haranguing actual lesbians for not being sexually interested in him?" And so on.
- da39a3ee 5y agoIt's not about genitals per se! Genitals are mentioned as a proxy for the concept of biological sex. I think you know that, but are pretending not to. So, by all means engage in debate with us about whether it's reasonable to use the words "man" and "women" to refer to the biological sex concepts; but please don't pretend the argument is about genitals: it's the concept of biologically-defined sex that's been attacked, not the concept of genitally-defined sex. I'm not saying all this talk about genitals is a great idea; it's perhaps a bit inflammatory and juvenile. But that's not the point here.
- da39a3ee 5y agoReposting the comment by daft_isnt_it which was flagged and is marked as dead (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30908306 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30908306): Dear fellow HN users: please do not flag things simply because they are representing a stance that you disagree with; we should use down-voting for that if we have the karma. This post does not violate our guidelines: -------------------------------------- There are many good reasons why one might want to refer to a person's biological sex in conversation. For example: "Why is that man being allowed to compete in a women's sporting event?" "Why is that man flashing his penis in the women-only area of the nude spa?" "Why is that man calling himself a lesbian and haranguing actual lesbians for not being sexually interested in him?" And so on.