Political Memes

hideshow 46 child comments

parent

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (25 children)

Ok, but that article doesn't actually say anything different? She's donating to organizations that are pushing against legislation that say trans women are the same as biological women. They aren't saying trans people shouldn't exist or shouldn't have healthcare. Or am I missing something? Again, still shitty, and it doesn't change my opinion of her either way, but am I crazy to think that's not exactly the same as trans erasure?

hideshow 25 child comments

parent

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 3 points 7 months ago

Oh, I see the misunderstanding. Affirming a trans person's preferred gender is healthcare. It's a thing society does which improves their health. You know, like wheelchair ramps and flouride in water. Taking away legal recognition is taking away healthcare.

She's also praised and encouraged the Cass Review, which claimed medical treatment for trans teens isn't safe or effective, and is being used to excuse the new ban on puberty blockers.

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -2 points 7 months ago (23 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 23 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago (22 children)

People are quite clear in their criticism of her based on the things she says she does. You're trying to shift the conversation to something unrelated.

If criticisms of Rowling's Transphobia are invalid they should be easy to dispute instead of trying to build an ad hominim Strawman.

hideshow 22 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (21 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 21 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago* (20 children)

Then once again: that should be very easy to discredit. The fact that you have invented a strawman instead of addressing the criticisms actually being presented speaks volumes.

hideshow 20 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (19 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 19 child comments

parent

[+] Tmiwi@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (18 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 18 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 point 7 months ago* (17 children)

"sure, she has said all these bigoted things, I don't see the problem with it."

Then I can't help you.

hideshow 17 child comments

parent

[+] Tmiwi@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (17 children)

[removed by mod]

hideshow 17 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 point 7 months ago (16 children)

She has been outspoken against anti-hate speech laws that would protect trans people.

Can you please explain how a reasonable person interprets the phrase "people who menstruate" as an attack on women?

hideshow 16 child comments

parent

[+] Tmiwi@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (15 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 15 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (14 children)

I'm not sure why she feels that that phrase is an attack on women, you'd have to ask her.

Of course. "Yes it talks like a duck, but we can't be sure if that's actually a quack or just a noise that happens to sound exactly like a duck."

I asked what has she said about trans people?

What do you think being upset about the phrase "people who menstruate" says about trans people? In what world does using the phrase "people who menstruate" instead of "women" harm women? It's a more precise term, because not all women actually menstruate. Prepubescent girls and post-menopausal women do not menstruate. Are they not women?

"That whistle is broken. Yes, everytime you blow it all the animals near by seem to react, but neither of us actually heard anything so clearly it's not a whistle."

hideshow 14 child comments

parent

[+] Tmiwi@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago (13 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 13 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (12 children)

If you cover your ears and close your eyes I guess you can convince yourself her complaints about the term "people who menstruate" has nothing to do with Trans People, but in reality that argument is disingenuous as fuck.

hideshow 12 child comments

parent

[+] Tmiwi@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (11 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 11 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (10 children)

Young women and old women aren't cis women?

She's coming from a place of "trans bad" then finding an excuse for it (protecting women) while completely missing the point that her argument harms cis women because she is only focusing on "trans bad" and not actually focusing on protecting women at all.

hideshow 10 child comments

parent

[+] Tmiwi@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (9 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (8 children)

A few people have mentioned the young and old women point, I don't quite understand that tbh. They will and have menstruated and that clearly isn't the point she's making.

Are you purposely being obtuse? If someone is using the phrase "people who menstruate" that is because they are talking about something directly relevant to menstruation. A study about menstruation and its effects on the body is in fact irrelevant to the very young and the very old. "Should we have supplies on hand for people who menstruate" means the very young and very old are not relevant to the discussion.

She's clearly referencing the point that biological men don't menstruate and never will and so shouldn't be included in that group

Which is why "people who menstruate" was used. The strawman is treating this like an attack on women instead of a more exact term for the specific people relevant.

hideshow 8 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (7 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 point 7 months ago (6 children)

because it denies women’s hard-won sex-based rights.

It does not do that in any way what so ever. It is a dog whistle, the mask she hides behind to spew her bigotry, and you have either fallen for it or are using the same tactics.

A sex-based definition clarifies the “people who menstruate” conversation

No, it doesn't, because of the reasons I said above:

A study about menstruation and its effects on the body is in fact irrelevant to the very young and the very old. “Should we have supplies on hand for people who menstruate” means the very young and very old are not relevant to the discussion.

As I said before: The obsession with not allowing the term "People who menstruate" actively harms cis gendered women who do not menstruate, because it says "You are not a real woman." Once again, a bigot has "defended" 'traditional' gender roles so hard they have looped around to harming cis gendered people in their attacks on trans people.

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (5 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 point 7 months ago (4 children)

You are moving the argument. I am talking specifically of her complaints about the term "people who menstruate". That is not a "situation in which sex and gender rights are in tension with each other", is has nothing to do with women having sex-specific places, nor someone who is biologically male wanting access to one of those spaces. It has nothing to do with protecting women.

This is all as relevant as saying "She's not transphobic, she is against stealing." That's all well and good, but completely irrelevant to this specific instance of transphobic bigotry that I am talking about.

Some women don’t menstruate

Correct

but a sex-based definition doesn’t exclude them from being “real women”

Agreed

They’re just women who don’t menstruate.

Therefore, if you were using the phrase "people who menstruate" the "correct" term for that would in fact not be "women" because there are women who do not menstruate.

I will agree with you on one point however:

You don’t have to agree with her worldview, but it’s overall coherent.

Correct, it is the worldview of a bigot.

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

The whole "people who menstruate" thing is peak idpol and designed to waste our time arguing about it instead of developing class consciousness.

"She's not a bigot, just a power hungry oligarch?"

Okay, so we can both agree she's a piece of shit and people shouldn't be helping her acquire more wealth?

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (1 child)

[deleted]

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 point 7 months ago

Of course. You've argued about this and defended Rowling for days, but when I refuse to let you shift the argument and insist you defend your arguments it's suddenly unimportant and a waste of time.

parent

load more comments (-1 replies)

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (19 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 19 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (18 children)

Not what that article says at all.

hideshow 18 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago (17 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 17 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (16 children)

Okay, you've convinced me that the article says something that it doesn't say at all. Good job.

hideshow 16 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago (15 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 15 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 1 point 7 months ago* (14 children)

"I am not a trans woman, I am a girl. I was raised as a girl, I grew up as a girl, the people in my village have always known me as a girl," Khelif said.

From your article

hideshow 14 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 1 point 7 months ago (13 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 13 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago (12 children)

Congratulations! You're learning that gender is actually a spectrum!

What you quoted:

she has the SRY gene

What you said:

Some male babies are born with ambiguous genitalia

But the article did not say anything about her being born with ambiguous genitalia. Did you hallucinate while reading the article or just felt like lying to everyone?

You don't even understand the basics of what you're trying to argue about. Please, for everyone's sake, educate yourself

So let me educate you: there are people born with the SRY gene but only female physical characteristics. There are people born without the SRY gene that have a penis. So what defines a male? Is it being born with a penis, is it having the SRY gene, or is it something more complicated than that?

hideshow 12 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (11 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 11 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago* (10 children)

What makes someone male or female is the type of gametes their body is organized around producing.

Okay, please educate me:

Person A has the SRY gene but their body does not have any male characteristics, and never did. They were born with a vagina and never had a penis. Are they male or female?

Person B does not have the SRY gene but was born with a penis. Are they male or female?

Person C was born with both a penis and a vagina, are they male and female?

hideshow 10 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (9 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 9 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago (8 children)

So having never had a genetic test it is impossible for me to know my sex? In fact, for the vast majority of people in the world we don't know their sex at all!

In that case it seems excessively foolish to have laws and policies based around sex, because 99% of the population have not had the appropriate tests to determine their sex.

hideshow 8 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (7 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 7 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago (6 children)

Anyone that has had a child knows what their sex is.

Clearly not, as you are claiming Khelif's mother did not know the sex of her own child. So how could anybody know without a gentic test?

hideshow 6 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (5 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 5 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago (4 children)

So until someone has a child it is impossible to know their sex without genetic testing? Still seems absurd to have any rules or polices regarding sex. How can we separate children by sex if we don't know their sex?

hideshow 4 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (3 children)

[deleted]

hideshow 3 child comments

parent

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

This is all a digression from the fact that Khelif is self-admittedly male.

Not what Khelif has said in the slightest. You're trying to distract from your argument defining her as such.

Khelif made a statement.

You responded to that with the erroneous statement "that makes Khelif male".

I've been responding directly to your statemen, and you're saying that's a digression despite it being your entire argument, because you can't actually defend it. You're stating it as a fact, and when questioned claim that it doesn't matter while continuing to assert it as fact.

So far we have determined that according to you the only way for someone to know what sex they are is if they have a child or get genetically tested. What bathroom should I use? Don't know because I haven't had a child. My niece wants to join an after school sports team, guess we better have them genetically tested first so we know what team they are allowed to be on, because unless she gets pregnant there is no other way to tell.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[+] powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (1 child)

[deleted]

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago

You're spewing lies

Pot, meet kettle.

Khelif admitted to being male

Again, never actually happened. Only under your definition of male that no one else uses because it is completely useless as a classification.

Giving birth is one way of knowing.

You've said there are many ways to know, but somehow can only keep giving the same one. As I've said repeatedly: someone who has not given birth cannot know. I guess we should limit women's sports to people who have been impregnated. That is the only logical conclusion I can come to from your arguments. Why else would you keep bringing up giving birth as "one way" (the only way) to know?

Please stop acting mentally disabled.

And some abelism for good measure. I'm expect to believe you are rational, level headed, and empathetic when this is how you respond to someone who disagrees with you?