I have *not* conflated intersex people with trans people. I said that there are intersex people who are trans. That is a fact. Pretending trans intersex people don't exist, cuz it messes up your DNA=truth hypothesis, helps nobody -especially not intersex people.
-
-
Replying to @MadAlice10_6_2 @fletcherkathy8 and
I'm saying that intersex people's situation is distinctly different to trans people in general, and shouldn't be appropriated. HT for XX male syndrome at puberty, for e.g., is not the same as HT for a TM. It is a response to an underlying biological condition. Do better
5 replies 3 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @unwitod @MadAlice10_6_2 and
Aaaand here's the whole point of the challenge to the idea of biological essentialism "Person A gets to have HRT to change their body in ways that make them happier and function better because their body is actually wrong Person B doesn't because their body is fine"
2 replies 4 retweets 63 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
Person A gets opiates on prescription because they are in pain. Person B doesn’t because they just like the buzz. It’s so unfair!
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @Shatterface @unwitod and
Oh are we gonna start talking about how awesome and successful gatekeeping drug access has been as a policy, and the totally unbiased and compassionate ways doctors make judgments about "drug-seeking" behavior
1 reply 3 retweets 70 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
And again with the Gish-gallop. Do you think people should be entitled to free opiates for recreational purposes? Who should pay for them? Should we give them to kids like you want to do with puberty blockers and dildos?
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Shatterface @unwitod and
That's not what "Gish gallop" means And no one has proposed making estradiol available to buy in bulk in the supermarket, although the analogy of getting high on hormones is stupid to begin with
2 replies 1 retweet 64 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
Gish galloping is dragging entirely unrelated matters into an argument to distract from the main point, which is precisely what you are doing now, no doubt as a prelude to 4 more fucking days arguing about what Gish gallop means.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Shatterface @unwitod and
Which one of us brought up opioids again? Go back and check
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
That’s an *analogy*. Do you know how figurative language works? No, don’t answer that because we’ll get four days on that too. This thread is about the nature of sex, which is something you keep dodging every time you regurgitate another Wikipedia page on bleach or flamingos.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Yeah so you're the one Gish galloping, in fact - throwing out shitty opinions one after another as a trump card ("Oh so you support DRUG ADDICTS too, huh") The thing is I actually do strongly oppose biological essentialism across the board, not just as a "TRA talking point"
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Shatterface and
So yes, I think the discussion about opioids is very relevant, and if you didn't you shouldn't have mentioned it The whole discussion about the bioconservative model of "health" is relevant
1 reply 1 retweet 11 likes -
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.