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

submitted by BEB from schweizermonat.ch

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]GConly 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 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.

[–]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!