"If we are told one male has transitioned and the other has not, we would be able to reliably pick out which is the transitioned male and which male has not transitioned."
Bing bang boom. Simple. "The word means what it conveys."
I get complaining about definition distortion ("liberal", "fascist", "literally"), I lament that all the time and how it leads to "talking past each other". But this is clearly in a different category. I learned through the comments on your article here that it's not a semantic debate as much as it is a semantic tactic for saying "actually you're just crazy" in a roundabout way.
But I suppose there is a sliver of merit to the idea behind this "transition doesn't exist" rhetoric you're arguing against (at risk of lumping myself in with those very impolite comments). You describe transition as the sum of several practical but inexact changes — inasmuch, it's not like "graduating" where there's a single official date where one moment you're not and the next you are. It's more like becoming an adult. I imagine a lot of people who consider transitioning are hoping for a distinct moment where they're "fixed"/"cured", but looking at it that way is probably unhealthy. Transition is necessarily defined by something else (certain % of people assume a different gender, or you have a different gut reaction when looking in the mirror). Those criteria being different for various people, and relying on subjective or impractical-to-measure metrics, the existence of gender transition is definitely fuzzy around the edges.
I already defined it for you and explained multiple times how it's not circular but your Big TERF Brain is incapable of appreciating the logical distinction between these two definitions:
(1) "Trans" means anyone who is trans (circular)
(2) Trans refers to the collective community of people who utter the words "I am trans" when asked "Are you are trans?", which picks out a definite subset of people in the world.
A definition like (2) doesn't work for "woman" because woman is a biological construct referencing a mind-independent fact. But trans is quintenssially a socio-cultural phenomenon, and therefore this style of definition is perfectly appropriate because it captures the socially constructed nature of the phenomenon and provides a unifying definition for nonbinary and those who medicalize.
"If we are told one male has transitioned and the other has not, we would be able to reliably pick out which is the transitioned male and which male has not transitioned."
Bing bang boom. Simple. "The word means what it conveys."
I get complaining about definition distortion ("liberal", "fascist", "literally"), I lament that all the time and how it leads to "talking past each other". But this is clearly in a different category. I learned through the comments on your article here that it's not a semantic debate as much as it is a semantic tactic for saying "actually you're just crazy" in a roundabout way.
But I suppose there is a sliver of merit to the idea behind this "transition doesn't exist" rhetoric you're arguing against (at risk of lumping myself in with those very impolite comments). You describe transition as the sum of several practical but inexact changes — inasmuch, it's not like "graduating" where there's a single official date where one moment you're not and the next you are. It's more like becoming an adult. I imagine a lot of people who consider transitioning are hoping for a distinct moment where they're "fixed"/"cured", but looking at it that way is probably unhealthy. Transition is necessarily defined by something else (certain % of people assume a different gender, or you have a different gut reaction when looking in the mirror). Those criteria being different for various people, and relying on subjective or impractical-to-measure metrics, the existence of gender transition is definitely fuzzy around the edges.
Mental illness exists.
That's not a counterargument, but I appreciate your comment.
Indeed it does. "Attention whore" isn't in the DSM, though. This man is far too impressed with himself. And trans isn't real.
That’s not an argument
I already defined it for you and explained multiple times how it's not circular but your Big TERF Brain is incapable of appreciating the logical distinction between these two definitions:
(1) "Trans" means anyone who is trans (circular)
(2) Trans refers to the collective community of people who utter the words "I am trans" when asked "Are you are trans?", which picks out a definite subset of people in the world.
A definition like (2) doesn't work for "woman" because woman is a biological construct referencing a mind-independent fact. But trans is quintenssially a socio-cultural phenomenon, and therefore this style of definition is perfectly appropriate because it captures the socially constructed nature of the phenomenon and provides a unifying definition for nonbinary and those who medicalize.
Wow, you're so edgy!
Define "troon."
Trans is all
Lies!
They know it deep down , which is why they’re always so defensive and why they invented all the stupid terms like “ transphobia “, TERF, etc!
Not all men are in on this.. it’s only the trans” women” who are upholding this dangerous ideology!
Oh look another man shitting on the terfs
Shitty arguments deserve to be shat on.
Good job not responding to any of the actual arguments I make in this article 👍
Don’t you have better things to do than endlessly repeat yourself while simultaneously not saying anything substantial?
TERFism has destroyed your ability to think clearly. Sad.
You are a walking talking case study in the Dunning-Kruger effect. It’s quite fascinating, actually.