I don’t use that phrase out of choice.
-
-
Replying to @bullrike @disquegache and
So what's wrong with the phrase, the idea that non women can get pregnant or the part where women are people?
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @EmilyBanting1 @disquegache and
The problem lies in erasing female humans as a sex class. We’re not having it, deal with it.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @bullrike @EmilyBanting1 and
the concept of sex class presupposes class mobility, doesn't it? you know, like economically, a hired worker may get lucky enough to become a bourgeois.e while an "employer" may get bankrupt & start having to earn a wage like the rest of the proletariat?
1 reply 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @disquegache @bullrike and
if your philosophy implies there should be a set of social groups with fixed & immutable membership, then the word you're looking for is caste and you should start openly stating that you're advocating for a caste system in 21st-century europe.
1 reply 0 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @disquegache @bullrike and
On some level I'm a "discourse accelerationist" about this stuff I'm just so impatient with all the complicated ducking and weaving and bracketing TERFs do to argue they're not essentialists They obviously ARE essentialists and they should just fucking own it
2 replies 5 retweets 35 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @disquegache and
They're not just essentialists by definition they let essentialism color everything they think and say and do, they just hurry to pull the fig leaf over it when directly challenged on the word "essentialism" Just BE AN ESSENTIALIST and stand over there with the "race realists"
2 replies 3 retweets 33 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @disquegache and
Kathleen Stock getting all in the weeds about how when you have a traditional women's sewing circle it's a cultural space that's informed by everyone there having a uterus and even if you can't verbalize it, the whole feminine energy it has is disrupted by letting a penis in
2 replies 3 retweets 27 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @disquegache and
Using all these fucking words for what that "energy" or "quality" or whatever is -- it just *looks* and *feels* and *smells* female The word is "essence", Kathleen, the name for the thing you're saying right now was established long ago as "essentialism"
1 reply 3 retweets 26 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @disquegache and
except the argument could be made that a trans person is trans BECAUSE they possess that "essence"
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
Yes, this is why they accuse their opponents of being "the real essentialists", even though the first step to arguing your way out of genuinely believing in an essence is making it arbitrarily transferable
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @disquegache and
It's so stupid, "essence" is a concept so easily interpreted in so many ways
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @RiffChick @arthur_affect and
What I want to ask bioessentialists is what makes a woman that you can't give to take away?
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
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.