Just a silly wizard show
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 0 points 7 months ago (9 children)
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 7 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 7 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 7 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 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?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments