As long as pimps, priests, and politicians know what a female body is
Jonah Mix has an absolute stemwinder of a piece on the hot fashion of guys lolling around on Twitter explaining how complicated biology is. I stashed a couple of sentences to remember and then I gave up because it was all that good.
It’s so easy to get sucked into this debate, to get that hot indignation in your stomach that comes when a foolish claim is so proudly asserted. And I don’t even have skin in the game — binary or not, my sex will still land me squarely in the “paid more, raped less” category.
That’s the first one I stashed, that second sentence.
The point is, debating “what is a woman, really?” is a luxury, given the facts.
Isn’t it odd that sex was never so complicated before? There was nothing ethereal about biology when it came to allocating the right to vote, or own property, or walk down the street at night without fear. We knew perfectly well what made someone female when that female-ness guaranteed a life of subservience and pain. Only when women began to say no did their bodies become a concept.
That’s the second bit I stashed, and it’s where I stopped stashing because it’s all like that to the end.
So many feminists have made this point, over and over again. I see them say it. I know you read it. Did you listen? If not, why? And why do you always respond when I say it? It seems you do know who has a female body, when it comes to deciding which perspective gets ignored.
Don’t they though.
Sex is such a mystery to you when women want shelters for themselves, meetings for themselves, words for themselves. Pardon me for asking, but is it equally mysterious when you log off Twitter and move over to Pornhub? The true nature of a female body is so complex when you lecture. Does it become simple again when you masturbate? Who does the laundry in your house? Were you somehow able to navigate an inchoate soup of X’s and Y’s to saddle your girlfriend with the dishes?
As a friend said on Twitter, scorching.
As long as pimps, priests, and politicians know what a female body is, I do too. The moment they’re confused — the moment they hesitate, the moment they qualify, the moment they adopt the restraint and caution you demand from the targets of their abuse— then I’ll happily open myself up to ambiguity. Until then, I beg you. Reserve your philosopher’s curiosity, your scientific rigor, for the ten thousand other questions that don’t make a thought experiment out of an atrocity.
Bam.
Well, I’d say at least some politicians, and the Humberside police, are beginning to show signs of confusion…
Slow, awed applause.
Beautiful.
Really, really good.
Dayum. That deserves a thousand mic drops.
And demonstrator (yet again) of the weary fact that there is more than one way to heap up a glib pile of (mainly) horseshit.
Bringing up e.g. complete androgen insensitivity to muddy the concept of sex is merely the equivalent to asking at what point does a pile of rice cease being a pile. The entire refuge in ‘but what it sex anyway’ is just a refuge in the Sorites paradox. They appear to be unaware that a word can have fuzzy boundary conditions, and yet still have an understandable and widely accepted meaning.
Understandable that they haven’t heard of this though; this has only been a settled concept for goddamn 2,400 years!
A new movement is needed: one that is against all categories. Let everyone’s cry be, up and down all the highways and byways, DOWN WITH ALL CATEGORIES…!!!
(I hope I haven’t used any there myself.)
Omar, what if those highways and byways identify as railroad tracks and airports?
We’re working on it.
@Omar #10 ROTFL.