If "gender" ("femininity" and "masculinity") is biological because of sexual dimorphism, then why are we fighting against "gender" when things like having muscles are biologically "masculine" and things like being short are biologically "feminine"?

submitted by Nohope from (self.GenderCritical)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]vitunrotta 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Who the hell says "gender" is being fought against? Wot. Genders are the ROLES which we are supposed to play because of our BIOLOGICAL sex. To be honest your text is a big ramble, so whatever.

You seem like a a very confused person or a troll. If the first, please educate yourself: if the latter, please leave.

[–]Nohope[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The point of GC is to abolish "gender" ("femininity" or "masculinity") or the "gender roles" you call it because that's what made girls that are tough and hate pink/make-up/dresses think they must be boys since they are different from other girls and don't conform to the "roles" most girls have based on their sex so they take hormones and get surgeries, that's just how "trans" was made. The point of GC is we have a biological sex but nobody is supposed to play any roles that people think are there because of our biological sex

If anything, I think most GCs disagree with the point of GC, they are for "gender"/"gender roles" and they want girls/women and boys/males to play the roles that are there because of their "biological sex" so they see "gender non-conforming" people as failures and "defects" like transmedicalists because they're not doing what you expect them to do

It's just shocking that most GCs are "gender" essentialists like transmedicalists are

[–]PassionateIntensity 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

they are for "gender"/"gender roles" and they want girls/women and boys/males to play the roles that are there because of their "biological sex" so they see "gender non-conforming" people as failures and "defects" like transmedicalists because they're not doing what you expect them to do

Total fucking nonsense. MOST OF US ARE GNC.

[–]vitunrotta 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Dude, your username pretty much encapsulates the point of this so called conversation, so I'll just leave you ramble on wherever else you want... But I'm done trying to talk sense to a fucking flip-flop.

All the best and do get help, your thinking is not nearly as sane as you may think it is.

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

The point of GC is to abolish sexist stereotypes.

Everything you said after that falls down the rabbit hole of confusion because when you wrote that, you were still assuming that the word "gender" could mean "sexist stereotypes" AND "biological sex" at the same time. But those two terms directly contradict each other. Which is why most of us who have participated in these discussions for years, tend to never use the word "gender" by itself.

If anything, I think most GCs disagree with the point of GC, they are for "gender"/"gender roles" and they want girls/women and boys/males to play the roles that are there because of their "biological sex" so they see "gender non-conforming" people as failures and "defects" like transmedicalists because they're not doing what you expect them to do

It's just shocking that most GCs are "gender" essentialists like transmedicalists are

Try as I might, no matter how badly I superimpose contradictory terms on top of each other, I still can't figure out how anybody could arrive at that conclusion. Perhaps you could help explain to me? I would love to understand how someone new to GC reasoned through that. What gives you the impression that GC are in favor of sexist gender stereotypes?