Prominent US biologist, Heather Heying, pushes back on the Uber Woke & Transwomen are Women

submitted by BEB from (schweizermonat.ch)

all 13 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]GConly 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

It is focused on markers of identity—sex, race, disability—and effectively carves out ways to divide us, rather than unite us in our common humanity.

It's called divide and conquer. I know a lot of people here have accepted intersectionality and critical theory as essential to radical feminism, but it's based on some very warped dogma that can be pulled apart if you take a look at the facts. That's the reason the woke get so abusive and violent when an academic challenges the dogma, wokeness doesn't stand up to scrutiny. It's only weapons are complex obfuscation (aka confusing the middle classes in media, college, and politics with wordy bullshit), and silencing dissent with threats, deplatforming, and hate speech legislation in public under the pretence of silencing hate speech/Nazis.

This is behind the attempts to ban Abigail Shrier's book, Irreversible Damage. It has dangerous hard facts in it that damage the narrative, so screaming it down and tantrums is literally the only option left (as trans theory falls apart upon close examination).

If this data makes it through the hard skulls of legislators and into some media lynchpins, the whole trans rights house of cards is going to collapse. It might well expose why it's so dangerous to allow woke mobbers and activists to control legislative process to the public at large.

It's 'woke' fragility.

[–]BEB[S] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I feel so lucky that I was at university decades before Queer Theory and intersectionality took hold. I kind of understand and support intersectionality, but I think its proponents have gone way too far.

It's particularly irritating to me that now we are apparently not supposed to treat people as people. I have friends of all sorts of ethnicities and religions, from many different countries and just about every socio-economic background and IMO it's because I'm from the Martin Luther King era of don't judge people by the color of their skin but rather the content of their character.

I also think intersectionality is now being used to divide and conquer: how can we unite against the 0.1% if we each have our own micro-identities nursing our own personal micro-aggressions ?

[–]soundsituation 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I know a lot of people here have accepted intersectionality and critical theory as essential to radical feminism, but it's based on some very warped dogma that can be pulled apart if you take a look at the facts.

Could you say more about this?

[–]reluctant_commenter 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'm not the commenter you're responding to, but if you're interested in reading more, someone posted this article on s/lgbdropthet about Queer Theory.

edit: forgot this https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-queer-theory/

From the article:

Queer Theory exists, in a nutshell, to antagonize norms, normativity, and the normal—that is, anything that can be considered normal by society (even in accurate, neutral description) and thus that carries or can be construed to imply a morally normative expectation about it, which it deems intrinsically oppressive. This attitude is probably most clearly understood in the binary dichotomy “normal” versus “abnormal,” noting that there is a relatively positive connotation to “normal” as compared to a relatively negative connotation to “abnormal.” Considering ways that society tends to expect one’s behavior to be within certain bounds of “normalcy,” and everything falling outside of that is “abnormal,” “perverted,” or “crazy,” may clarify this understanding. Queer Theory wouldn’t merely seek to expand the boundaries of “normal” to include circumstances like homosexuality or, stretching the idea further, intersex conditions but to abolish the idea that “normal” is anything but constraining and oppressive entirely (see also, violence of categorization).

So you see, it is really a core philosophical difference between TQ and the original aims of, say, a movement aimed at obtaining equal rights for an oppressed group.

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

I never thanked you for this

Thank you!! Paradigm-expanding

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

No prob :) have a good one!

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

Intersectionality is really no bogeyman. All it is is a lens that acknowledges that we can be privileged in some ways, marginalised in others, and it problematises hard and fast ideas about who is a victim and why and how. Unfortunately it's been exploited by people who want to use it to obfuscate their own privileged positions and to get resources away from those who really need them.

[–][deleted] 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So to adults of all ages who have been captured, even just a little, by the new ideology, allow me this example of what the capture looks like. I will use the messaging of Trans Rights Activists, whom I distinguish from true trans people, the latter of which are extremely rare, and do not pretend that biology is a fiction. The Trans Rights Activists, however, would have us believe, among other things, that men can give birth—and they’ve got the New York Times going along with their fantasy.

Note that this is crazy talk. Five hundred million uninterrupted years of sexual reproduction in our lineage assures us that male and female are distinct phenomena. It is no less crazy than suggesting that plants are animals or that Europe is Australia. This is crazy talk, and no amount of social pressure changes that fact.

How, then, does the crazy idea spread?

When you object that, actually, men cannot give birth, your activist friend will look at you with sadness in her eyes, and a question: Why can you not just be generous and kind?

If you persist in your claim that men are not women, you will be shamed. And after a while, after repeated exposure to the thing-that-is-proclaimed-to-be-true-that-patently-is-not, you may begin to question your understanding of reality.

Now the activist will swoop in and ask you to cede small points. Because this isn’t your area of expertise, and in no way the hill you want to die on, you may accept them. Surely the only difference between men and women is chromosomes? What then do we make of chromosomal anomalies? Doesn’t this put the lie to biological sex? (To which accurate answers are: Male and female are far older than sex chromosomes. Complex systems are imperfect. And no, biological sex is real.)

But if instead you do cede small points, the activist will be so appreciative, and make another request: Can’t you go a little further? This is often more effective than brute force attempts to change thinking. You will be asked to “educate yourself!” and you will be provided the bad thinking of some over-educated and under-smart “experts” with which to do so. Beware arguments from authority, though. Track your logic back to first principles when you can.

If you resist the sad eyes and gentle words and attempts to re-educate you, the activist may move down the list of accepted actions: after shaming, perhaps gaslighting. Then smearing of your reputation, including outright lies. Threats of violence are a last resort—but only if you resist! The activist will assure you: it’s best not to resist. Accept the crazy talk, else you are inviting whatever happens to you. You are doing this to yourself!

Do not cede small points in order to keep the peace. The peace will not be kept this way. Cede small points, and you will be expected to cede more. Apologize for things you did not do, and you will be held accountable for those things, and more. This movement is cloaked so beautifully, as if it is a gift of freedom and justice for all. But it is not that. It brings division and destruction. Do not accept the horse at the gates.

[–]purrfect 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I've recently followed her on Twitter. She's quite awesome, let me tell you!

[–]chazzstrong 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm surprised Twitter allows her the platform. I'm sure that will change when enough people report her for 'hate-speech'. >.>

[–]BEB[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Heying and her very interesting husband have a podcast too, DarkHorse podcast, which seems to be getting popular.

Here's her twitter:

@HeatherEHeying

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

Great read, thanks for sharing.

[–]Daraincork 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Evergreen footage on YouTube is quite shocking and scary. Heather Heying is some woman for one woman.