Being gender critical or gender identity driven is not about facts, but belief. Which means: 1. We don't have to agree 2. We don't have to understand 3. Our view reflects personal experience 4. Policy should consider both 5. Depending on context, one or other lens matters morehttps://twitter.com/MForstater/status/1181837334729433089 …
-
Its not so much that it doesn't depend on facts (I am not totally relativist on this!) I would agree with 1 to 3 (like religion, we don't have to agree or understand, just be tolerant of each other).
I don't think policy should ever assume that everyone has a 'gender identity'. Sometimes it needs to reflect that everyone has a sex (which does not imply they must conform to gender norms) People should have freedom to believe (or not believe) in ideas about gender identity
-
-
Yes! I agree assuming someone has a gender identity is essentially imposing gender identity view on them (aka proselytism). There are still policy contexts where it makes sense to acknowledge gender identity - free speech, privacy, name change for example.
-
But agreed that medical, safety and anything related to violence against women (physical, economical, social, sexual, etc.) should be only driven by sex policy wise.
- 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.