Then what is any of anyone’s business?
No, that’s not right.
There are a lot of reasons it’s not right, but to take just one central one – that amounts to telling women that “gender” is none of our business, that the social rules and constraints imposed on women are none of our business, that the perceived inferiority and subordinate nature of women is none of our business, that feminism is none of our business. That claim is obviously absurd, and also obviously insulting. She might as well tell workers that unions are none of their business.
It’s especially repellent because she is a graduate student in philosophy. If gender is none of women’s business then everything is none of philosophy’s business – so what is she doing getting a PhD in philosophy?
She specializes in this kind of curt, smart-ass quippery instead of actual thought or argument, and it’s one of the more annoying things about her.
An actual philosopher’s take on this person >> https://kathleenstock.com/response-to-christa-petersons-blog/
A PhD in philosophy doesn’t mean much anymore, it requires a more thorough reading of these hoop jumpers to see if it was deservedly awarded, but then again who wants to wade through that much garbage. :P
It gives away the libertarian narcissism at the heart of it all, doesn’t it? I mean, everyone minding their own business works perfectly well until one of us interacts in any way at all with anyone else. Once that happens… well, minding one’s own business automatically involves others.
Hers is a strange, atomised world.
Enzyme, I think to her minding your own business means she gets to do what she wants, and you get to do what she wants.
@iknklast
By Jove, I think you’ve got it.
This is also an example of the rhetorical shell-games people play. “Gender” is simultaneously utterly personal and totally internal (and thus, not anyone else’s business), and also a matter of grave public concern (and thus, everyone’s business). Which of these applies in any given situation is simply a matter of the speaker’s choice. It’s Stage-Two Humpty-Dumpty-ism, really, wherein you not only demand the right to demand that everyone accept your definition of a word or term, but also the right to change that meaning at will.
If it’s not my business, why do I need to know the pronouns?