No, I am not going to lose today to arguing about definitions of 'woman' and 'gender' in relation to trans issues. I co-wrote this piece on the subject which covers all I have to say about it.https://areomagazine.com/2017/09/27/an-argument-for-a-liberal-and-rational-approach-to-transgender-rights-and-inclusion/ …
-
-
That's the problem, at least for me, if they are by consensus they are not innate. So, if I decide to self-identity as Marie Antoinette's left testicle, I only have that right if it is conferred upon me by my (hopefully) cake-eating peers
-
They're not innate, no. How could they be? We have to work it out. We have only ourselves to blame or praise for the way we now treat trans people.
-
Some of them might be innate and tied to biologically instinctual behaviors of social animals. Historically, how many independently developed religions boil down to, "Don't be a dick to people unless they're outside/endangering your tribe, because fuck those guys."
-
Our moral sense is innate, yes. But we know it's not innate to give everyone human rights because we'd have done that before now.
-
We kinda did, it just lacked sophistication and we called it "religion". The Golden Rule is absolutely an expression of a human right. The rule of law is thousands of years old and exists to codify rights perceived as innate.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.