Their positions are ridiculous and ahistorical, but also reinforce the idea that 'woman' is defined based on gender stereotypes, rather than on having a female body.
-
-
Replying to @MeghanEMurphy
Again, you're not explaining how these believes are non/antifeminist, you're just listing things you don't like about their beliefs. The idea of women not being subservient to the man of the house is also ahistorical but apparently it's a staple of feminism.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Banned_Ali
I've written on this extensively. Perhaps these might help clarify: https://www.feministcurrent.com/2017/11/23/trans-activists-truly-cared-feminism-respect-womens-spaces/ … https://www.feministcurrent.com/2017/05/11/bill-c-16-misunderstands-gender-harms-women-patriarchy/ … https://www.nationalobserver.com/2016/10/25/opinion/opinion-bill-c-16-flawed-ways-most-canadians-have-not-considered …https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/women-only-spa-counterpoint-1.4170158 …
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MeghanEMurphy
No, not really. I'm well aware of both the intersectional and the TERF argument and I think you're both laughably wrong. You're just fighting to preserve female privileges (which contradict the overall narrative of patriarchal oppression BTW).
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Banned_Ali @MeghanEMurphy
This is why your best argument against the intersectional crowd is a feeble attempt to paint them as the icky patriarchy and definitely-not-feminists, and not a refutation of their argument. This is why I called the patriarchy a crutch. Why argue when you can just invoke Satan?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Banned_Ali
lol that's not what I've argued. Clearly you didn't read what I sent you.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MeghanEMurphy
You've stated more than once in this thread that the intersectional/trans feminist crowd is antifeminist. How am I misconstruing your position.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Banned_Ali
What I mean is this is not the basis of my arguments against gender identity ideology and legislation. This statement is true BASED on my arguments against gender identity/legislation, which is outlined in the articles I share with you.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MeghanEMurphy
Your arguments against gender identity legislation can be broadly summarised as "this hurts women". The intersectional argument can conversely be summarised as "this creates more equality". These are both feminist arguments, the latter arguably more so (see dictionary definition)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Banned_Ali
They can be summarized as "gender identity legislation and ideology trump women's sex-based rights, are regressive, ignore material reality, and are incoherent."
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
What sex-based rights should be exclusive to women and how is that not at odds with the notion of equality?
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.