Well if the proposal for Option B is not coherent enough for us two to work out what it is maybe we are giving it too much credit for being a coherent idea?
-
-
They say we should not consider the "biological" (their quotes) sex binary in analysis as it "bears no relation to the patterns of gendered oppression, including economic, social and political exclusion, experienced by all women".
-
They say women’s experiences of oppression and discrimination "vary according to gender, race, class, sexual orientation and gender identity, disability, age, caste, ethnicity, migration status, amongst other factors"....
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
That's what I'm disagreeing with. Option B identifed a set of people 99% of whom are child bearers, so of course your analysis of their position in society can be based on that. Saying "hey trans women we're going to regard you as women in almost all contexts" doesnt stop it.
-
Except that TJN's statement explicitly says that biological sex "*bears no relation* to the patterns of gendered oppression, including economic, social and political exclusion, experienced by all women". That is what i am calling out as nonsense.
- 2 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.
The question is does option B put together two sets of people "some women" + "some not women" and call the new category "women" (why? for what end?)...