Both: In light of recent events. In what context is Voyeurism and Indecent Exposure acceptable? Is there a rational justification for making an exception for males who claim to be women?

submitted by Penultimate_Penance from (self.GCdebatesQT)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Indeed, but this is not evolution of language. When language is changing - old phenomena are not dissapearing, there are still words for them. Most often new phenomena are getting new word instead. So if language would evolve like that, then instead of word "woman" we'd have some new word which would be combining both women and transwomen together, while old word either stayed or meaning of old word would go to some new word too. While now word for half of a population and for sexes is dissapearing, and only in western world in post-modernistic way.

[–]circlingmyownvoid2 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

Meanings of established words also change. Look at awesome for instance. It originally meant so great as to be terrifying. Now it basically just means cool.

[–]ZveroboyAlinaIs clownfish a clown or a fish? 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It does not contradicts to what I have said.

However, some concepts are no longer needed - like aether, as they found to be anti-scientific and useless. So language around them is dissapearing as well.

Distinguishing men and women is not useless in a lot of spheres of life - starting from the very basic healthcare after kid is being born.