So… I feel like I waste most of my time, but the things I can think of are philosophy and science videos, books, music theory and practice. The problem is consistency for me. Perhaps a group, a class, a club, or something like that if you struggle with it too.
I would have preferred for Zuko from ATLA to remain single.
They’re still angry at neurodivergent adults who do not work full time in the old-fashioned borderline-slavery works of today because they got their mental and physical conditions, but could be wildly productive (and happier) if only institutions put less obstacles and more flexibility for them to work on their special interests’ fields.
But no, billionaires, keep trying to put neurodivergents into offices and call-centers (in my region) instead of focusing on their talents. 21st century capitalism is not only exploitative but dumb.
I’m quite… uh… there’s must be a term in English. Like those kind of people that do not raise their voices enough, that do not do enough. In my case, not out of laziness. I’m too skeptical of ideas, to the point of knowing what the parties say, but not taking a stance. I marked the opinions I do have.
I believe that there’s like a theoretical field that should be open to speculation and investigation, and a daily life that has to be lived with the best ethics we can find and the suspension of judgement around the rest. Like I wouldn’t really know if gender exists as a biological reality or only a social construct; if the latter, I don’t know if it’s a social construct we should change, not change, abolish, cherish, etc. I’m kind of gender fluid or that’s what I think I am, so maybe I’m biased because I do not experience any attachment to my gender. And I do not see a problem in questioning these things because I do not think these questions should translate to how we treat people.
For example, you say that their belief that gender is not important is invalidating their identities, and I partially agree, but I believe GC people should respect pronouns and stuff because that’s just being respectful. It’s no different to someone asking a change in nicknames, or a joke not being made. It takes zero effort and it means a lot to the trans folk in question. It’s like “I do not believe gender should be a thing in our society, but to you it is important and I will acknowledge it as that in my treatment of you because I care for you”. And not in a patronizing way, but in a good faith way. And I would expect the same from other sides like how non-binary people can chat with binary trans folks (those who believe only in two genders). At the end of the day, we do not have the final answer, so trying to get solutions that serve us all should be our aim.
I understand the frustration that the trans community must feel when GC tell them, for example, that sports shouldn’t be gender-based but sex-based. And probably GC feel the same when others tell them that sports shouldn’t be sex-based but gender-based. It’s inevitable that they feel very strongly about this, but my naivety tells me that we need to make an effort to breath, to pause, and to find alternatives that makes the majority of us happy. Maybe sports based in something different (not sex and not gender). Bathrooms not divided by sex or gender either, maybe divided by something more functional (and something that helps with the disproportionate capacity given to one bathroom over the other nowadays).
Philosophy and science will continue to advance and change. In 300 years, people might look at us like we look at the “rationalists vs empiricists” debate or something like that. Just primitive frameworks that thanks to discoveries and better interpretations of the topic through the centuries are now obsolete and replaced by something in which we all had little points of truth and little points of nonsense.
We live so shortly, we know so little… I guess that’s where I’m coming. Like I’m not taking a firm stance on the theoretical because I honestly believe we are in a very difficult position, with little knowledge and little possibility of action. But on the practical, I would always defend people, from transphobia or otherwise. I wish for people to see their wills fulfilled as much as possible (and as long as they are not hurting others). In this case, I believe gender-based rights and words can exist alongside sex-based rights and different opinions. The major obstacle is not ideological but monetary, material. How can we have an AFAB-only club and a women-only club at the same time if capitalism is making it difficult to have even a single club? So I do not know if I’m a comrade in the communist sense, but I definitely agree with anticapitalism and I hope I do not affect the fight if I’m not actively helping it.
In Spanish people from all sides would call me «tibia» (warm, not quite cold and not quite warm). It’s an insult. I guess many would think that I cannot try to reconcile these kind of disagreements or contradictions, but that’s just what my insides tell me is correct and worth trying. I’m also like this in things like violent revolution (I’m hoping it’s not necessary like the standard Marxist believe) or veganism (in which animal suffering is not negotiable, but I think lab-meat or other alternatives might be a solution, temporary or permanent, while some vegans think it just incentives people to see animal meat and therefore animals as products still, but that’s why I’m open for it to be temporary).
Lol. Sorry, that’s a lot of text. I just wanted to present who I am honestly. As for the GC points, I do not know if I’m the correct person to try to explain it further, but I’ll try in another comment. I feel like I will distort it, but it’s a fun exercise at the same time (to try to be true to their texts).
Thank you for reading.
If we are to fight transphobia, we also need to understand what is gender-critical feminism and what is transphobic rhetoric disguised as feminism or activism.
It’s the “gender-critical” fucks that conflate sex with gender! That’s the whole point, they claim gender and sex is the same thing so you can’t change your gender cause you can’t change your chomosomes, etc. It’s so incredibly dishonest to read “biological sex is unchanging and should not be conflated with gender” as support for gender critical views, I’m honestly speechless.
No, they don’t. Gender-critical theory divides categorically sex and gender, which coincides with some folks in the TQ+ communities (not all). They believe that human brains are unisex, all brains. Therefore, for them, genders are just mumbojumbo (hence the name: critical of gender, of the idea of them even existing outside our imagination and conviction).
In consequence, they believe the word “woman” should only serve the purpose of identifying humans born with female biology or majority of it, and “man” should identify the male ones or with majority of it. That’s why they believe a male-body (AMAB to us) cannot be a “woman” in any relevant sense (for them, a female-body or AFAB to us), and that their acting or feeling as the “feminine” gender is just enacting that said mumbojumbo not understanding its need to be eradicated instead of performed and replicated. They are not against males or AMABs or “men” (for them) expressing their identities even if outside current societal expectations, but if gender is some kind of ghostly category and only sex exists and matters, then there’s no meaningful change there, they would still be males or AMABs or “men” (in their nomenclature) with no right to claim the female or AFAB or “women” (synonyms for them) spaces. That’s why they are always saying “sex-based and not gender-based [whatever]”.
In short, they are critical of the idea of gender and are in favor of abolishing genders, in our daily lives, in stores, in sports, etc. To them, brains are unisex and the only differences we have as humans around these topics are those around the sexes, so those are the ones that should dictate divisions (such as bathrooms or sports), if any (because some GC feminists want less divisions too, while others are okay with regular sex-based divisions).
So… they start very NB friendly and even TQ+ friendly (depending on the TQ+ because some trans folks do believe in gendered brains via intrauterine discharges of hormones or other theories). They are on a similar page to a lot of TQ+ with the unisex only-human-not-genders brain. The difference is that they believe we should eradicate genders instead of living a diversity of them or a classification or reclassification of them. They are okay with we would call “gender non-conforming” and any “gender expression”, but to them that’s just unisex humans being themselves, with only sex being important.
This is me speaking: I believe they won’t validate or give too much importance to others’ “gender”, only sex, and that’s the real collision with most of the QT+ folks.
That’s the real GC feminist theory. Then you have the transphobic and hateful people that hide their conservatism and gender essentialism behind a supposed GC feminism. Or the ones that start as GC and end up full on the hate wagon, I guess because they start hanging out with the wrong people (I think that was the case for J. K. Rowling).
This is me speaking again: I believe you can doubt someone’s gender is ontologically important, without disrespecting their personhood, their f+$ humanity. I mean, not that similar, dumb analogy, but I do not believe that my aunt is really feeling a god and really being chosen to live forever as she thinks she is, and I do think the world would be better without those religious beliefs, but I still respect and love my aunt and share time (even if it’s to listen to a Christian podcast). Sorry for the terrible analogy. I’m just trying to say that different ideologies can coexist, and choosing hatred instead of dialogue and understanding is a poor choice in my book.
As you can imagine, I concede to the article something: I am not in favor of banning real GC debates in universities. But transphobia? Get out of here.
Magnesium glycinate, +1. It saves my sleep…