Thank you for cutting through the bs and doing some of your own excellent re-centering here. At some point, the academicians created a path away from common sense. The definition fights take us further and further away from the need to protect women from domestic violence as the author noted, and also rape, harassment, acid attacks, ‘d…
Thank you for cutting through the bs and doing some of your own excellent re-centering here. At some point, the academicians created a path away from common sense. The definition fights take us further and further away from the need to protect women from domestic violence as the author noted, and also rape, harassment, acid attacks, ‘dis’honor killings—yes, all the hell on earth of the Patriarchy. And the women being sexually tortured in Ukraine? Yup I bet they can define ‘what is a woman’. Less sophisticated theorists to splinter us, please, and more who can “do” to lift the tide for all boats.
Exactly. The soldiers who are raping Ukrainian women seem to be able to identify women at a glance, don't they? Maybe they can give lessons to American politicians who seem confused.
It never fails to amaze me that people will let some dude on blockers pretend he's a woman, and yet Rachel Dolezal got raked over the coals for calling herself black when race really IS an undefinable spectrum in a biological sense, and sex something that is embedded irretrievably into every cell in your body.
Yep. The XX/XY paradigm is about as airtight as it gets in science. The "race" argument is a very different thing and immediately falls down; humans the world over have the same DNA; it's the genes expressed that are different, and we don't really know just how that works. In the late 'seventies, we were told in a genetics class - when you could actually say these things - that the average "black" in America had about 15% "white" genes.
Frankly, I'm looking forward through miscegenation to the creation of a coffee-coloured world race, and then, since we can't tell the difference among ourselves, we can get on to important stuff.
true, however she's not a great example. While most people these days are not entirely one thing in the US - Rachel had zero dna pointing to calling herself Black. Same with Elizabeth Warren. Rachel was neither genetically "black" even by the one drop definition, nor was she raised in a black family. Neither nature nor nurture could define her as black..
From what I read she claimed that her birth family treated her badly when she was growing up and she was very close to her adopted black siblings. I think her identification came by honestly and it makes me sad to see her pilloried.
She's not, but she sure does have a much more reasonable claim to being black than any man has to being a woman. It's the fact that the left is persecuting her for a small transgression and celebrating far worse ones.
Thank you for cutting through the bs and doing some of your own excellent re-centering here. At some point, the academicians created a path away from common sense. The definition fights take us further and further away from the need to protect women from domestic violence as the author noted, and also rape, harassment, acid attacks, ‘dis’honor killings—yes, all the hell on earth of the Patriarchy. And the women being sexually tortured in Ukraine? Yup I bet they can define ‘what is a woman’. Less sophisticated theorists to splinter us, please, and more who can “do” to lift the tide for all boats.
Exactly. The soldiers who are raping Ukrainian women seem to be able to identify women at a glance, don't they? Maybe they can give lessons to American politicians who seem confused.
It never fails to amaze me that people will let some dude on blockers pretend he's a woman, and yet Rachel Dolezal got raked over the coals for calling herself black when race really IS an undefinable spectrum in a biological sense, and sex something that is embedded irretrievably into every cell in your body.
Yep. The XX/XY paradigm is about as airtight as it gets in science. The "race" argument is a very different thing and immediately falls down; humans the world over have the same DNA; it's the genes expressed that are different, and we don't really know just how that works. In the late 'seventies, we were told in a genetics class - when you could actually say these things - that the average "black" in America had about 15% "white" genes.
Frankly, I'm looking forward through miscegenation to the creation of a coffee-coloured world race, and then, since we can't tell the difference among ourselves, we can get on to important stuff.
true, however she's not a great example. While most people these days are not entirely one thing in the US - Rachel had zero dna pointing to calling herself Black. Same with Elizabeth Warren. Rachel was neither genetically "black" even by the one drop definition, nor was she raised in a black family. Neither nature nor nurture could define her as black..
From what I read she claimed that her birth family treated her badly when she was growing up and she was very close to her adopted black siblings. I think her identification came by honestly and it makes me sad to see her pilloried.
She's not, but she sure does have a much more reasonable claim to being black than any man has to being a woman. It's the fact that the left is persecuting her for a small transgression and celebrating far worse ones.