Why do they get to shame? Why isn’t it the other side who gets to shame? It’s not shameful to recognize a male when you see one. It’s definitely shameful for a man to steal a woman’s place and win the top prize by claiming to be a woman.
Why do they get to shame? Why isn’t it the other side who gets to shame? It’s not shameful to recognize a male when you see one.
The more I think about it, the more I think it was and is a mistake to mainstream the terms “trans women” and “trans men.” It begs the question regarding their status. The mind immediately slips males into a different category. Should ALL women be allowed in women’s sports or only SOME women? Should we exclude the ones people think aren’t as WOMANLY as other women? The question basically answers itself, since it invokes memories of segregation and concerns about lesbians. Shameful past, enlightened present.
Personally, I’d prefer just using a blunt truth — they’re “men” — but absent that the most reasonable compromise is “trans-identified males.”It puts both sides of the controversy on even footing and avoids both question-begging and well-poisoning. The odds of this being mainstreamed at this point is probably slim to none, of course, because the word “male” triggers their trauma and because they’re now laying claim to the word “female.”
Words matter because truth matters. In retrospect, “transwomen/ trans women” should have been fought tooth and nail.
I’ve been passively resisting it by mostly not using it. I say “men who [call themselves / identify as / say they are] women” instead, mostly, with maybe some t.w. for the sake of brevity.
I’m Capricorn, so double goat me.
Chris Evert has also joined as a GOAT in retweeting Martina Navratilova’s support for women in athletics.
https://twitter.com/ChrissieEvert/status/1474747853671219204
Back when I followed Pro Tennis and attempted to play, she was an amazing player who earned her number one ranking.
The more I think about it, the more I think it was and is a mistake to mainstream the terms “trans women” and “trans men.” It begs the question regarding their status. The mind immediately slips males into a different category. Should ALL women be allowed in women’s sports or only SOME women? Should we exclude the ones people think aren’t as WOMANLY as other women? The question basically answers itself, since it invokes memories of segregation and concerns about lesbians. Shameful past, enlightened present.
Personally, I’d prefer just using a blunt truth — they’re “men” — but absent that the most reasonable compromise is “trans-identified males.”It puts both sides of the controversy on even footing and avoids both question-begging and well-poisoning. The odds of this being mainstreamed at this point is probably slim to none, of course, because the word “male” triggers their trauma and because they’re now laying claim to the word “female.”
Words matter because truth matters. In retrospect, “transwomen/ trans women” should have been fought tooth and nail.
I’ve been passively resisting it by mostly not using it. I say “men who [call themselves / identify as / say they are] women” instead, mostly, with maybe some t.w. for the sake of brevity.
@Sastra #3
re: “Words matter because truth matters. In retrospect, “transwomen / trans women” should have been fought tooth and nail.”
I thinks it’s even worse than that. We MUST clearly distinguish the same-sex-attracted sub-groups:
a) straight women
b) lesbian women
c) straight men
d) gay men
e) enigmatic people
Each of which might ALSO identify as trans, but the SMIT (straight-male-identifying-trans) contingent presents unique challenges.
Would it be fair to say that classic TERF’s are primarily “exclusionary” of the SMIT cohort?