The original wording was "At a public conference I won’t serve on a panel of two people or more unless there is at least one woman on the panel, not including the Chair.”
-
-
Replying to @MForstater @dalgoso and
Given that pledge wording, I don't understand what your objection is. A trans woman is a woman - seems quite simple & straightforward. It seems frankly odd that you are talking about diversity while seemingly being openly hostile towards trans people.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @MForstater @sergiotpinto and
Maya, I am frustrated by your exclusive definition of women. I encourage you to please do more research into this topichttps://www.google.com.ar/amp/s/amp.economist.com/open-future/2018/07/12/trans-inclusive-feminist-voices-are-being-ignored#ampf=undefined …
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @SarahEOV @sergiotpinto and
Thanks I've read that. How would you define women?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MForstater @sergiotpinto and
As someone who identifies as a woman.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @SarahEOV @sergiotpinto and
Sorry but that is a circular definition (I'm not just being argument , and thanks for chatting...) what is it that they are identifying as?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MForstater @SarahEOV and
I don't see that as circular. It's a category that can and should have multiple expressions/definitions, and the only just way to apply them is through self-identification.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
If I said a fersiopy is something that identifies as a fersiopy would you see that as circular? It tells you nothing about the nature of fersipoys. It's not a definition. How can a person tell whether they are inside the category or outside?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MForstater @SarahEOV and
I'm pretty sure when it comes to gender, folks know. I don't need a definition to tell me if they are, I can just ask them. (Just like I don't need a definition to tell me what I am.)
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I have a definition of woman - adult human female. It does not come with any expectations or requirements for gendered behaviour. It is clear, well understood & critical for women rights including the right to spaces without male bodies. Why ditch this for something undefinable?
-
-
Replying to @MForstater @dalgoso and
Do you see that this excludes women who do not necessarily have the reproductive parts that “females” are thought to be born with? Why exclude? What are the gains there? Exclusion perpetuates the problems were trying solve, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
No it doesn't. Girls (most often XX but there are rare chromosome variations) who are born with female anatomy but eg incomplete vaginas, no uterus etc are female. Boys/ men who express traditionally feminine gender roles or have plastic surgery do not literally become women.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like - 3 more replies
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.