For QT: Why is gender identity different than religion in social protocols?

submitted by divingrightintowork from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

gender abolition would change all of society, in theory.

I don't think anyone "gender critical" thinks the abolition of the sex stereotypes and other sexist ideas and beliefs that constitute "gender" is a realistic or achievable end goal. Or, for that matter, even a desirable one. We are arguing against forcing everyone in society to have to accept and adhere to the strict, deeply regressive and sexist sex stereotypes that genderists hold dear. And we are against the basic tenet of Genderology which says that whether a human being is male or female, boy or girl, man or woman, is not determined by the person's biology, but by his or her level of perceived "masculinity" or "femininity" and which - if any - sex stereotypes he or she hews to and prefers.

Most people who are "gender critical" are not saying that genderists should not be allowed to have their sexist beliefs and to cleave to sexist sex stereotypes and judge themselves and others by sexist standards. We just don't think their sexist beliefs, stereotypes and standards should be imposed on all of society, forced down children's throats and made into the de facto state religion that everyone is expected to follow and no one is allowed to challenge.

[–]divingrightintowork[S] 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (6 children)

bravo - I've been saying that I'm not really GC or TRA, but I'm a liberalist... and it's the negative rights of GC/RF aligned people that are being most trampled right now, whereas TRAs are demanding highly undue positive "rights" which are really more like privileges.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

I'm a liberalist

Do you have any links to a definition?

Does this mean you do or don't identify as a feminist? What have you got against gender critical feminism?

[–]divingrightintowork[S] 5 insightful - 6 fun5 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 6 fun -  (4 children)

Sure! At a glance this seems to be an ok description of it - https://www.liberalcurrents.com/liberalism-article-paul-crider/ Current liberalists I enjoy are people like Helen Pluckrose, Jonathan Haidt, Greg Lukianoff, Jonathan Rauch... The ACLU, circa 1978 was a liberal (as in liberalist) institution. Let me know if this helps. The word feminist is too meaningless to really mean much to me at this point, but if you can tell me what it means to you, I Can tell you if I'm a feminist by your definition :)

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

OK but that's still quite general in regard to gender or feminism.

Obviously I understand liberal and feminism can mean different things. I'd see you cannot identify as a liberal feminist because of it's common relationship to trans politics.

But why not radical feminist?

How essentialist are you?

[–]divingrightintowork[S] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Uh probably not very essentialist, but what does essential mean to you? I'm also not really much of a radical. I guess I'm not sure what you're trying to get at.... I believe myself to follow the values of liberalism, probably with a leftist bent. I don't see why I couldn't be a liberal feminist, which I would consider different than a "Libfem," or I suppose "Liberal Feminist." I don't reject a label just because others use it poorly or incoherently. I'm just not sure if there's a definition of feminism that is meaningful and relatable enough to attach to myself. I don't really see the point or purpose.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Uh probably not very essentialist, but what does essential mean to you?

Anything from very bad essentialism, "man hunts" "woman cooks" to some very mild things, "men and women have slightly different behavioural biases on a couple traits."

Usually connected to evolutionary ideas which are unpopular in progressive circles.

A classic essentialist behaviour is criminality. Men appear far more criminal than women. Across all cultures. Some might say it's a product of dimorphism but I think it seems more basic.

Neither sex wants to "own" that but it might be directly correlated with other behaviours with more positive reputations, such as risk taking.

Is the trans element the only aspect of "liberal feminism" you object to? I think the other topics would be "sex positivity," porn, bdsm, sex work, gay rights. I'd say radical feminism would object to marriage and most gender norms.

We do probably need better political labels.

[–]divingrightintowork[S] 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

I mean I believe humans are sexually dimorphic, just like literally every other mammal... and that's going to.. show up in places and ways... useful in considering societal policies, but not really on an individual level... So like, sexed changing rooms are fine because while any given man is not necc A Jerk, the frequency of men who are jerks to women is much higher than women who are jerks to men (and other women), plus average man is bigger stronger than average woman. Like sure there may be a woman who is bigger and stronger than randomly selected man, but probably not.

Is that essentialist?

Re LibFem, I just don't see the value in really digging into the label either which way.... I'm not really an ideologue... I suppose you could call liberalism an ideology, though it's.... hard to really squeeze into that, it's more of a value, for a pluralistic society.