Distracted1
Philosopher
del again
Last edited:
Interesting thread from somebody with a CCSD/DSD, discussing problems with the term 'intersex' and the harmful effects of gender identity essentialists appropriating these conditions for ideological reasons.
Newly acquired documents reveal the cozy behind-the-scenes relationship between leadership of the human rights group and TERF organizations.Britain’s Equalities Watchdog Met Privately With Anti-Trans Groups
Exclusive: Leaked emails and documents obtained by VICE World News show how senior leaders at the Equality and Human Rights Commission worked to erase trans rights.
...
VICE World News has obtained documents revealing leaders at the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) as being key players in removing rights from trans people, through supporting legal cases that opposed trans equality.
The commission’s executives have also organised multiple private meetings with anti-trans lobbyists over the last year, the emails and documents reveal.
Equality campaigners have previously complained about the organisation being “too politicised” because the commission’s most senior leaders – also known as the commissioners, or board – are appointed by the minister for women and equalities, a role currently held by Liz Truss.
In December 2020, Truss – who is also UK Foreign Secretary and a potential successor to Boris Johnson as prime minister – appointed Baroness Kishwer Falkner as chair of the EHRC, which is the most important role in the organisation. Falkner also serves as a non-aligned member of the House of Lords.
Newly acquired documents reveal the cozy behind-the-scenes relationship between leadership of the human rights group and TERF organizations.
The article contains a nice summary of the recent history of the org taking an anti-trans stance, including the recent appointment of leadership by the conservative party.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxdzwn/ehrc-trans-rights-leaked-emails
Secondly, EHRC didn't meet with "TERF" groups, they met with and listened to FEMALES who have a stake in these policies.
Women/Men has meant females/males for as long as the words existed. Giving in to the practice of using the terms Woman to refer to a male, and Man to refer to a female under the guise of "gender is separate from sex" is moving to the inevitable, predictable, and purposeful next step wherein "male" and "female" are stripped of their meaning as well."Williams has been accused of transphobia for repeatedly calling trans women “males”
A lot of medical textbooks say the same - Unless you're screaming it in someone's face I don't see how this is transphobic
At the end of the day, that Vox article is complete baloney.
I think there is a more fundamental and older pattern going on. "Progress" is a direction not a destination. It is towards something like freeing the individual from moral prescriptions around outsider sexuality and lifestyle. At each step in the progress, the demand is looked at as a specific case. That the argument about sex may contradict the argument previously made on gender doesn't matter. What unifies them is the direction of travel - to liberate the abnormal from the tyranny of the normal. You do that by deconstructing the category "normal".Women/Men has meant females/males for as long as the words existed. Giving in to the practice of using the terms Woman to refer to a male, and Man to refer to a female under the guise of "gender is separate from sex" is moving to the inevitable, predictable, and purposeful next step wherein "male" and "female" are stripped of their meaning as well.
As evidenced by the recently linked articles wherein the terms are used interchangeably (which they rightly always have been, the new usage is a reversal of the paradigm) and various other recent scenarios (the highest grossing "female" Jeopardy contestant e.g.)
The slight of hand has worked like this:
"that is not a man, it is a woman"
"well, maybe biologically, but his 'gender' is a man"
"nonsense, gender is inextricably linked to sex"
"no, gender is a role- sex is not"
"oh, okay if you say so, I guess he is a man after all"
"which is why he is entitled to compete in "male" sports"
"what are you talking about? male is not a gender"
"of course it is- gender is inextricably linked to sex- and we have already agreed that his "gender" is a man- ergo his sex is ipso facto "male"
""
Same thing, right?
In a way, I've always been amused at the use of "TERF" as a slur. The radical feminists, and the not quite so radical feminists, and anyone who is concerned about women's rights recognizes that there are some ways where biology really is paramount, is going to end up excluding transwomen from something. So, "trans exclusionary" isn't an insult. But of course, the people who use the term don't really think, and so they use it as an insult, and so it's an insult. Like all sorts of other group tags, the word is not inherently offensive, but it becomes offensive based on how it is used.
Are the people who TERF is thrown at usually radical feminists? Maybe sometimes, but if the word is a descriptor, then it is a very loose one that is used very widely. My impression is that when it is used, it is often not from the perspective of wanting to understand, or debate, the views of the TERF in question. Is JK Rowling a radical anything?I don't think it's a slur at all.
Are the people who TERF is thrown at usually radical feminists? Maybe sometimes, but if the word is a descriptor, then it is a very loose one that is used very widely. My impression is that when it is used, it is often not from the perspective of wanting to understand, or debate, the views of the TERF in question. Is JK Rowling a radical anything?
OK, but if JK Rowling is a TERF, what does TERF actually mean? If it's a slur it doesn't really need to mean anything beyond labeling the despised enemy of the moment who must be silenced. If it's a slur, it doesn't need to be coherent. If it's a slur then having a nominal specific meaning while being applied widely to people that specific meaning doesn't fit is a feature not a bug. Does TERF actually mean anything beyond identifying somebody as an enemy of the trans-activists?"Radical feminist" is a somewhat misleading label, but it's a label that has stuck. Ironically, "radical" feminism is somewhat more old fashioned, tracing its roots back to the 60s and 70s.
It would be nicer if movements weren't name in such ways that don't age so well, that way you don't end up with "radical" feminists or "modernist" art that are actually throwbacks to prior eras, but whatcha gonna do?
I don't think it's any stretch of the imagination to call LGB Alliance or Fair Play for Women groups that are heavily influenced by radical feminist thought.
but whatcha gonna do?
OK, but if JK Rowling is a TERF, what does TERF actually mean? If it's a slur it doesn't really need to mean anything beyond labeling the despised enemy of the moment who must be silenced. If it's a slur, it doesn't need to be coherent. If it's a slur then having a nominal specific meaning while being applied widely to people that specific meaning doesn't fit is a feature not a bug. Does TERF actually mean anything beyond identifying somebody as an enemy of the trans-activists?