Skylar Baker-JordanVerified account

Lmao im blocked. Did she say that ugh

I’d totally forgotten about this! Honestly didn’t pay it much attention at time time (can’t remember why; it’s been a crazy year personally as you know so I’ve been checked out) but I’m adding it to my read list

fwiw, for women and girls aka females, sex matters 24/7/365 all day everyday for 10,000 years give or take thank you for the article, @SkylarJordan . i know you're taking some heat. take care of yourself. it's ok to ask for support

As a fellow North Carolinian with a trans kid (probably not much younger than you), I wish you'd reconsider using trans exclusionary rhetoric. We fought like hell to overturn HB2 here. I hate to see potential allies using the same language as people who want to annihilate my kid.

Who wants to annihilate your kid? certainly not any gender critical feminist.

Your anti-trans crusade uses *exactly* the same language as the ultraconservatives who pushed a "bathroom bill" on my state. When you tell a kid they aren't allowed to use the bathroom, you are telling them that they don't deserve to exist. It's not feminist. It's just hateful.

I don’t support bathroom bans at all - and am on the record saying so - but I hardly think telling someone they can’t use the toilet is the same as telling them they don’t exist Honestly, this hyperbolic language does you such a disservice

Bathroom accessibility is a basic human right. Whether Jim Crow or inaccessibility or TERFism is the source, denying someone a basic human right is one way of indicating that you think that person is less human. This isn't hyperbole. It's history.

Access to public restrooms is not a human right that I remember being in the Universal Declaration. You could argue it’s a civil right, as many have, but that’s different. Anyway, as I said, I don’t support policing gender at the bathroom door

Yes, it is a civil right - one that many groups have had to fight to achieve. I'm disabled, so that's not an academic point for me. By "human right," I mean it not in a legalistic sense but literally. All humans should have the right to access public restrooms for waste relief.

How would you feel if able-bodied ppl started saying they identified as disabled and demanded to use the toilets you fought to have? And if you objected or asked how they could identify as disabled, you were called an ableist and a bigot?

The trans community is so hypocritical. Trans community: “Sex and gender are separate! Conflating them is transphobic!” Cis people: “Ok, I’m not into this sex, but I’ll still respect their gender identity.” Trans community: “Transphobic! Gender and sex are connected!” The fuck?

I think your fundamental misunderstanding here is that you don’t understand how two things that shouldn’t be conflated can still be contextually related.

How are they not conflating them if they are saying you can’t respect someone’s identity and not be attracted to their sex? I ask this as a trans person, I don’t follow the logic at all.

If you’re attracted to a gender you’re supposedly ‘respecting’, it’s pretty ridiculous to suddenly lose romantic attraction solely based on what you have assumed their sex is—a patriarchal sex binary, for that matter. That’s a lazy attempt to particularly exclude.

Losing interest because you’re not sexually compatible is understandable

Not really. Because in social context, you actually lost interest because of a myopic perspective of sex identities, not sexual incompatibility(whatever that means).

If you’re not attracted to someone’s junk, you’re not compatible sexually. You’ll lose your boner lmao. I don’t see how y’all can say genital preference can be overcome after establishing sexual orientation is not a choice. It’s like conversion therapy with a leftist twist.

It’s actually not because people are not solely attracted to genitals. Your ‘sexual incompatibility’ idea stems from the same place “penis is for men and vagina is for women” ideas stem from: Binary and myopic ideas of sex and gender. Intersex people also exist.