This is why there needed to be a Gay Pride and not a Straight Pride. Because straight people simply didn't need to address their sexuality & social acceptance of it. They could just live it & be accepted.
-
Show this thread
-
It is completely unsurprising that trans people would need to address issues of gender identity more than cis people for exactly the same reason. How pointing this out is currently getting me labelled a bad person who thinks transphobia doesn't exist, I don't know.
1 reply 2 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
I suspect that, in reality, 'cis people are obsessed with gender' simply means that society has a dominant conception of it as cis - that gender correlates with gonads - and that this makes things hard for trans people.
2 replies 1 retweet 7 likesShow this thread -
It does make things hard for trans people but it's unlikely to go away because gender nearly always does correlate with gonads and we have evolved to recognise this because we are a sexually reproducing species.
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
We support trans rights best, not by blaming the cis majority for conforming roughly to gender norms but by refuting the idea that doing so is some kind of moral imperative.
4 replies 8 retweets 35 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Here's a question for you (an actual question, not a dick rhetorical one): Are some biological imperatives also moral ones (e.g. a woman's desire to have children)?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cathode_ray8
Having children is morally neutral. But our morality comes from our biology. Our prefrontal cortex mostly. Gives us fairness, empathy, compassion etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I don't think it is. I think it's overwhelmingly seen as a moral positive, in that it is the greatest responsibility that we have. Not only that, but we choose long term mates in large part based on our judgement of them as potential parents.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cathode_ray8
Having children can certainly be seen as a moral positive but we don't actually have any responsibility to perpetuate our species. Another argument is that humans are so bad for other life on this planet, we have a moral responsibility to reduce our impact by not having children.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I must admit I am slightly astonished at this response. If we have a responsibility to the next generation, then don't we have a responsibility that there is a next generation? As for your environmental nihilism, I tend to view humans as a net good (I am on team human).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
No. The responsibility to care for the children we do have is not a responsibility to have children. This is fairly consistent. We nearly always have responsibility for things we have done but not the responsibility to do everything that responsibility needs to be taken for.
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.