If 'women' were really in opposition to trans acceptance and 'white people' were really in opposition to immigration, it is very unlikely either of those things could happen because the former groups are much larger and more socially powerful.
You mean 'he' and 'she'? That can refer to sex or gender or both as they nearly always match.
-
-
Right - and my point is that what people mean by gendered terms is quite clearly based on biology, until a small minority of people started complaining that it was a human rights offence to do so.
-
I don't think we disagree on that, do we? Except that biology also seems to underlie trans identity.
-
Yes, but that isn't the aspect of biology commonly used to categorise people as men or women.
-
No, it is still a biological reality though. It's not going away and if we want to understand what constitutes gender identity, it helps to understand the science, even though it is scant & inconclusive right now. We all know people haven't commonly done this or been able to.
-
I agree on the need for study on the question of subjective sense of gender, but to call this gender identity is to redefine gender identity.
-
Gender identity is assigned by society on the basis of sex, as in "It's a boy!" when a male is born.
-
Yes, we know that. We also trans people exist and the science explaining why is rapidly mounting. It won't go away if we say 'This isn't how we've always done this.'
-
Absolutely - I don't expect gender dysphoria to just go away. But I don't think it a solution to make gender meaningless, or to view the traditional meaning of gendered terms human rights offences.
- 1 more reply
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.