TERF's - Feminists that don't think trans women are women

Post Reply New Topic

In certain areas, yes.

Back on the brain thing, I had read that there are trends common to the genders, that a trans person can have one closer to the trends typical for their identified gender. But none of these mean much other than social stuff, because I think industries can benefit from a vary of those in it, and you will always have exceptions that I think should be welcomed even if not typical.

But really don't know how much accuracy it is, since it is all super complex that a bunch of stuff we can observe by its makeup can be inconclusive up against the language of people talking of their experiences. There is again what I had heard that while a few decades ago girls were seen as less able at things like maths, but are now starting to actually perform on average slightly better than boys. As far as I know it is not just things like now teaching methods are more in the favour of girls, but I think back to studies that have shown that psychology of expectations in performance of things like maths can have a surprising impact.

Being a woman in theoretical physics, I'm strongly against quotas or pairity politics. It's okay for me that in extended Math class you have 3/4 boys and in extended Linguistic class you have 3/4 girls. Same exam, free will to choose, pushing it further would be unfair.
It's not okay when you don't give Lego Mindstorms to a girl "because it's for boys" and it's not okay when you tell boys that interest in clothing design is "gay" or something.

I don't identify as a feminist, where I live, feminism has done enough, time to enjoy the fruit and switch to other issues (like psychiatric patient treatment - I have dealt with lots of prejudice, including among professionals, because of my psychiatric diagnoses, way more than because of my gender).
"Female brain" is, as you have just agreed, a statistical phenomenon, not an intrinsic fundamental difference.

It's a bit like saying "building roads is evil because the Nazi have built a lot of roads and used them for evil purposes"

By the way, let's not take "equality" to absurd. All people are equally human but they differ in appearance, capabilities, preferences, talents or lack of them, health and million other things.
My view is:
1. individual variance is much more important than statistical dispairities between groups;
2. Let's do our best to build a society adapted to the best of its individuals.

This, I don't know how some people jump from "men and women are equal" (which I always understood to refer to value as humans) to "men and women are identical" - something I've personally never heard anyone claiming.

By no means the only instance, but the one that leaps to mind.

^
Yeah, sorry, I forgot that no matter how crazy something is, there's still someone who believes in it

All humans are equal in fundamental worth or moral status.  They do not have identical appearance, physical stature, abilities, talents, eye color, DNA structure, et cetera -- identical twins notwithstanding.

"Equal" is not the same as "Identical"

"Equality" is not the same as "Fairness", either.

If we could all agree on the meanings of the words we use, there would be a lot less conflict in discussions.

More close to hating every regime that is called communism because of how it is historically used by dictators that do horrible or inefficient things, and those people are still in that group. On paper communism is a wonderful thing, in practice as things are they tend to be hijacked by those who want power and stop freedoms.

Sure feminism has some nuts like TERFs and man haters, but it beats the likes incels. When I found out about egalitarianism, I went for it too, but it was filled with people who already thought that feminism had gone too far, when on average women were still disadvantaged more. Feminism can address problems that men experience, but it seems that outside of feminism guys who claim egalitarianism do not want to admit to things like toxic masculinity.

That's fair.
And I understand some may hate everything called "feminism" because they have encountered man haters.

I do not hate Feminism.  It is only a subset of Egalitarianism, after all, especially once you recognize and accept that all humans are equal in fundamental worth or moral status.  Reject this, and you reject Feminism. 

If feminism was a subset of egalitarianism, the above would not be real.

That was brilliant, Wolfram. Thanks for posting. I'm an egalitarian. I live by the tenant of "live and let live"; regardless of gender or sex, all humans must be treated equally with respect for one another's contributions. I see far too much misandry in this world, and find it hypocritical of people who claim to seek equality.

Re: TERFS
I have never read Harry Potter and know nothing of the franchise. Likewise I didn't read this whole thread or the Rowling one. What I'd like to know is why Harry Potter fans feel that Rowling had or has an obligation to share their personal political views? Of course people might be disappointed in her politics, but did Rowling have a social, political or contractual obligation to think a certain way, lest her fans be outraged? I'm confused by that.

Wow, that was very powerful. I too am an egalitarian. If there was a current movement by men to consider women as irrelevant, toxic or "the problem", I can assuredly say that I'd be an outspoken opponent of that kind of thinking. A free and healthy society that benefits both men and women can't exist unless each embraces the strengths and the differences that both sexes have. Teamwork rather than adversaries.

Apologies, but I could not finish watching that video without feeling my own rage against ignorance building up.

Unfortunately, feminism has fragmented along lines of ideology and degree of radicalism. In its purest state, feminism is all about parity for rights and opportunities between men and women. In its current form, feminism is balkanized, resulting in a condition that allows for any argument against feminism to focus on one or two minor extremist views as representative of the whole.

Equal rights and opportunities for all -- "#AllRightsMatter".

Can one or two minor extremist views on most any topic, if unacknowledged, unquestioned or not debated be incapable of bringing about change (for better or for worse)? Are "one or two minor extremist views" inconsequential because they're "minor extremist views?