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?
-
One more thing, we don’t need definitions of a group to prevent harms. We just investigate risks, and take steps to reduce harms, wherever they may be.
Women risk assess harms all the time. A stranger walks close to a lone woman on a dark street at night, wants to jump in a cab with her or sits close on an empty night bus. How do you risk assess? If stranger is female she is probably looking for safety in numbers, if a bloke...
-
-
you assess higher risk (at the very least it's an entitled dickhead not worried about making you uneasy). What if he's wearing makeup or a dress? Does this change the risk assessment? No (and yr not going to strike up conversation to find out his gender identity)
-
Point is we identify people's sex all the time very easily and use it for risk assessment. We cannot know another person "gender identity". Yet orgs are introducing policies (& laws) based on definitions which say risk assessment must *ignore* biological sex as risk factor
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.