you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]sisterinsomnia 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I didn't read the piece as stating that at all. And the Testosterone Rex book (which I have read in great detail) is all about biological sex, though I guess one could argue that women who take testosterone then join the kings, too. Fine does not go there at all if you read the paragraph where the relevant terms are used:

"Embracing criticism means engaging, seriously and in good faith, with arguments and evidence that challenge us. Documenting sexist, racist, cis-sexist or ‘blank-slatist’ biases in science is fine – as is disagreeing with the merit of such arguments, if you interrogate them and the evidence behind them in turn. But if you’re not a fan of seeing scientists’ views attributed to personal racism, transphobia or misogyny, then nor should you tolerate commentary about scientists supposedly being biased by their feminist motives."

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

Though I fully do get why it is scary not to toe the line on trans issues, given that even gentle questioning of any detail is transphobia. You are dancing on a tightrope if you are a public person.