QT but all can comment - How would you refute the argument that The phrase "transwomen are women" presupposes that there is a cultural role for women to fill?

submitted by DistantGlimmer from (self.GCdebatesQT)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]transwomanHesitantly QT? 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The only data you have is reports of trans people' s words. That is not objective or concrete in the fucking least.

I have more than just reports of trans people's words. I have mortality rates, literal statistical facts seen continuously across the vast majority of academic literature.

Now, where is your data showing harm against everyone else? You cry about being "harmed" but can't exemplify a single example. Your data doesn't exist, your entire argument is based in feelings. You are the epitome of the feels-over-reals caricature.

I don' t care if it hurts trans people

Awesome. According to you "minorities don't matter" just as I mentioned earlier. Mask off. Or not really, you've been this way the whole conversation.

You can' t know it because it' s never happened

Wait this works in my favor. You're admitting to having no data on the claim you're making. Therefore, the social utility brought about to 0.6% of the population is justified, unless you can prove that there is more harm done to everyone else.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I have more than just reports of trans people's words. I have mortality rates, literal statistical facts seen continuously across the vast majority of academic literature.

All of those are still based on feelings. You can' t be sure that those mortality rates were caused by these people being trans.

Now, where is your data showing harm against everyone else? You cry about being "harmed" but can't exemplify a single example.

As I already said, if the basis of it is feelings, I can tell you that I feel harmed. You keep asking for data that describes feelings and refuse to accept the data I am directly providing about myself. Proof that it' s only certain people' s feelings you care about. It' s the same for me, by the way, but the fact that you act like you' re the one on the high horse and you' re saving the World by doing it is grating to be generous.

Awesome. According to you "minorities don't matter" just as I mentioned earlier. Mask off. Or not really, you've been this way the whole conversation.

I actually care about minorities when the issues they have are not "Uééééééééééééé, I become suicidal if you don' t pretend reality doesn' t exist for my sake!". In that case, yeah, I don' t care.

Wait this works in my favor. You're admitting to having no data on the claim you're making. Therefore, the social utility brought about to 0.6% of the population is justified, unless you can prove that there is more harm done to everyone else.

I have no idea how you managed to make that leap. So I will make it even easier here: neither of us knows whether the change we are advocating for will bring benefits or not because, since neither social scenario has ever happened, we cannot make premonitions about how it is going to turn out. Both of us have opinions on what would happen: one of us might be right, both of us could be wrong, we simply do not know.

All we know is that you will keep whining about how that 0, 6% needs to be prioritized, and I will keep saying that I don' t give a damn about their feelings. And we will keep acting accordingly.