Omina_Sentenziosa

Right. But unfortunately, we live in a gendered society, not a postgenderist one. Gender abolition is going to take centuries. In the meantime, we should be modifying the social construction of gender to be least oppressive, and least harmful.

That' s your prerogative, I refuse to do it. I will keep acting like gender and self-id are idiotic and dangerous and I will keep not respecting them and criticizing at any given chance.

Given your inability to provide concrete examples thus far, you aren’t able to make this argument. Transgender people would benefit from an identity-based gendered society, GNC people would benefit, natal women and natal men would benefit, literally everyone would benefit from a transition away from expression-based gender to identity-based gender.

You can' t prove anything either. And again, I wouldn' t benefit from it, so it' s not "literally anyone".

Why are you so triggered right now? Good grief. Nobody is forcing you to do anything.

Awesome!

Like I said several times, I’m against self identification legislation, which includes things like compelled speech/misgendering. You can do whatever you want, you can choose to misgender trans people if you’d like, however, you’d be epistemologically incorrect in a world which accepts gender is rooted in self identification.

Thankfully that world will never exist. So I won' t have to worry about being "epistemologically" incorrect.

Got it. Unironic feels-over-reals. “Woman” would not exist in a postgenderist society. “Man” would not exist in a postgenderist society. They are entirely products of a gendered society.

Nope.

No. A male who identifies as a woman, is a woman, but not female.

Great: my definition of woman cannot exist without female biology. So a male cannot be a woman.

Is your argument really “minorities don’t matter”? Really? Given your inability to show how it negatively impacts the other 99.4% of the population, I absolutely support something which brings social utility to 0.6% of the population.

Well, I don' t. Not this. We aren' t talking about something that can indeed bring benefits, no matter how much you cry about it, or something that is literally not a big deal. This is both a huge deal and something that will bring problems.

I am strongly against compelled speech, so we can end this aspect of the discussion. My position does not include demanding people by force to gender trans people correctly. That being said, I don’t care, sorry. The “harm” of your limited unhappiness does not override the harm induced by not accepting transgender individuals in the social sense, as well as the transition to identity-based gender.

So, just to make it clear, you don' t care about the harm you are going to bring, but I should care about the harm I am going to bring. Got it.

Oh no, it absolutely does.

Wow, you see the future? That' s an awesome super-power!!!!

You have 0 concrete examples, 0 data backing your claims. Meanwhile, if you’d like to, I can provide you a plethora of research which directly shows that trans people are positively impacted by being socially accepted. Meanwhile, you’d need to present evidence that there is evident harm against everyone else that somehow outweighs the harm not accepting trans people would cause.

The only data you have is reports of trans people' s words. That is not objective or concrete in the fucking least. Just because it was written on a study, it doesn' t mean it' s true when it' s literally based on feelings. Even if it were true, just because it' s better for trans people it doesn' t mean it' s better in general. You can' t know it because it' s never happened, so you can' t have anything to compare your utopic ideas with what would indeed happen.

That said, let' s make it easy: I am not going to use your system or support your ideas. Ever. I don' t care if it hurts trans people, I prefer being able to call a man a man. So go on trying to make that world happen: I am glad that, if it ever happens, I will be long dead and I won' t have to live in it.

Good night.