What’s most important is not whether you listen to me about my view on Trans personhood. We need to listen to Trans people. And that doesn’t preclude listening to women or other marginalized people. But none of us should be arguing against the personhood of Trans people.
-
-
By “personhood,” I mean the basic human rights of Trans people, and especially their right to live in the world safely. Binary gender/sex is a construct. The lived experience of Trans people is not. The death of Trans people on college campuses is not.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
No Trans people (that I’ve seen here) are arguing women do not exist or that their lived experience is not real. For Trans people, these are things the Times letter puts up for debate. The existence, identity, personhood of Trans people is not up for academic (or any) debate.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Of course, there are outliers, and misogyny is incredibly real. But the hundreds (now thousands) of academics who have signed or affirmed the Times letter have gone on record. To be clear, their transphobia, is on record.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Hang on, the original Times letter has accumulated more signatures? I didn't realise it was an open letter, and I haven't seen it circulated (though that's probably because of how I curate my timeline).
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Volcanologist @davykind
It has been circulated and championed and affirmed by many more academics. The original tweet where it was shared, for example, now has 579 retweets and 1320 likes (some condemnation in the replies but also lots of support). The original signatories haven’t changed.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I have been shocked by the amount of public support the original letter has gotten. And, of course, I am also glad for the even greater support I’ve seen for the counter-letters. But I think we all have lots more work to do to create inclusive spaces for Trans people in academia.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
I am reluctant to comment because this is such a loaded issue. I dont think the signatories are denying the existence of trans people. I think they are agreeing that both sex and gender are complex and there are multiple ways to talk about it.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ambrouk
They absolutely are doing that and if you can’t see that then you need to reassess.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @ambrouk
By framing organizations dedicated to protecting trans people as attacking women they are simply regurgitating the narrative that trans women and trans people in general are somehow in conflict with feminism and women’s rights.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Not to mention the instigator is the letter believes that gay means being attracted to penises and lesbians to vaginas rather that attraction to men and women. So she has really no idea what she is talking about when it comes to LGTBQ+.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
If you are someone who reduces someone down to their genitals, that is fucked up. Trans women are women. End of story.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.