@v_urq @emily_esque I.e. Women (Cis + Trans) are women because they say they are not anatomy. Why do you insist on separating out TW?
-
-
Replying to @torreypeters
@v_urq@emily_esque you don't seem to understand the logical and rhetorical flaw in talking only about TW when it's the case for all women1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @torreypeters
@torreypeters@emily_esque I hit this language problem all the time in my writing. When I say "women" trans women assume they're excluded...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @e_urq
@torreypeters@emily_esque When I separate out trans women I'm asked why I make it seem like they are different.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @e_urq
@torreypeters@emily_esque Double binds, everywhere, when speaking of trans folks in print.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @e_urq
@v_urq@emily_esque you're a writer, language is supposed to be your responsibility. A carpenter might as well complain about wood2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @torreypeters
@v_urq@emily_esque try to grow, learn, evolve--rather than complain that writing well is too hard1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @torreypeters
@torreypeters@emily_esque I am trying, but it's hard when many trans activists are relatively unversed in science and resist discussing it1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @e_urq
@v_urq@emily_esque then make a compelling argument and convince people. Right now, you're just alienating them and isolating yourself1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @torreypeters
@torreypeters@emily_esque As I said, I think relying on feelings and cultural definitions only is dangerous. Because the feelings...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@torreypeters @emily_esque ...and definitions of opponents are as valid as those of trans people.
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.