GC: Why don't you get your gender identity legally changed?

submitted by SnowAssMan from (self.GCdebatesQT)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I agree with all of that. Of course actions speak louder than words. Problem is most people don't realise that a substantial number of people go by the reverse. A way to expose that is to beat them at their own game.

A lot of people are against the church being tax-exempt, bc it makes it easier for cults to spring up about the place. If enough businesses just claimed to be churches, the short-term benefits would be: not having to pay taxes for a while, while in the longterm you'd be drawing attention to the issue. What's the issue you have with this tactic?

I was reading Kathleen Stock's book, but the problem I found with it was that all the terminology is created by TRAs & so simply using the same terms already half-promotes transgenderism, by half-legitimising it. It's difficult to argue against an ideology without creating a whole new nomenclature, which you'd have to then convince everyone to agree with. So I think the conventional RadFem way to oppose transgenderism can somewhat backfire. If you infiltrate it, you can help decay it from the inside.

[–]one1won 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

From July 2021, FYI, referring to Stock:

she distances herself from “certain trends within feminism,” namely radical and gender-critical feminisms while taking issue with their “modern activism” (239). She hopes “for a better activism in the future”

And, about Stocks position:

sadly it is largely conformist to a reactionary politics.

See also the comments on the quoted review of Stock’s book. here: https://savageminds.substack.com/p/immaterial-girls

Women are not monolithic. Not every woman is a feminist, not every feminist is a Radfem. I read your comment as assuming Stock speaks as, or for, Radfems. Many women are refusing to say “cis” or “trans”, as there is no such thing outside the science of chemistry.

And, no. Infiltration is not the way for women. Detrans and Desisters are more likely to prove deleterious to the GII movement. But it’ll take time; some people do wisen up with life experience.

[–]SnowAssMan[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Not all GC feminists are radical feminists either.

Do you think GC feminists identifying as desisters or detrains would be a better tactic then?

[–]one1won 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You seem really attracted to lying, what’s up with that?

Meaning, No. “Self ID” scam is BS.