To have an impostor
They just don’t see it. They just don’t see that it’s her idenniny, and thus unassailable.
Among those quoted by CBC was Janet Smylie, a health academic of Métis heritage at the University of Toronto, who wrote a chapter in a 2017 book on Indigenous parenting edited by Bourassa.
Smylie told the broadcaster she had done her own research into Bourassa’s ancestry. “It makes you feel a bit sick,” she said. “To have an impostor who is speaking on behalf of Métis and Indigenous people to the country about literally what it means to be Métis … that’s very disturbing and upsetting and harmful.”
But it’s her iden
Ok I’ll drop the sarcasm now and ask straight up: if this is unacceptable then why is it not merely acceptable to claim to be a woman when you’re a man, but so approved and embraced and proselytized that we’re punished for not believing the claim?
The differences between human populations are pretty trivial compared to the differences between women and men. There’s one overarching difference without which none of us would exist to have differences: the different role in making more of us.
The differences between people of indigenous ancestry and people of settler ancestry are superficial. The differences between women and men are basic. So why is it that we’re being harangued and bullied and punished into pretending to believe that men are women if they say they are, while people who make false claims to being indigenous are seen as shocking frauds? Why are women who pretend to be black or indigenous punished while men who pretend to be women are stunning and brave? Why is one an impostor and the other a star?
Lots of hair-tearing and teeth-gnashing recently at the swamp from which you escaped over this topic. Men becoming women is SO different to people assuming a racial identity. People who assume a racial identity are frauds, cheats, cultural appropriators whilst men in women face are totes authentic women.
I read it for the lolz as knots were twisted and intellects bent out of shape.
There aren’t enough rolled eyes in the world.
Here’s my attempt at an explanation.
I think the differing standards here have to do with the perception that trans women are making such a significant change and sacrifice that it can’t be for personal advantage, it must be a sincere, deeply felt condition.
So far, the instances I’m aware of in which white people claimed to be of a minority race don’t really involve much sacrifice, and quite often some gain. They don’t have to make many changes to their lives, except maybe some trivial ones like wearing a certain kind of clothing or jewelry, or hanging a different kind of art on your wall. Most if not all of them can still “pass” as white when it suits them, and even move back and forth freely between the identities, so they aren’t giving up any white privilege, and they tend to work in fields where their claimed minority status is possibly an advantage. So it’s easy to imagine that this behavior can be cynical and opportunistic.
By contrast, the traditional (if I can use such a term for a relatively recent label) impression of a trans person is of someone who has made considerable sacrifices, i.e. dramatic medical and surgical interventions. It doesn’t seem likely that anyone is going to put themselves through that other than because of a sincere, deeply felt belief. That is not necessarily true any more, of course, according to the “self-identity is sufficient” claimants, but I think the image remains. For that matter, a trans woman who hasn’t undergone any medical transition is probably going to find it difficult to “pass,” and is exposing herself to a fair bit of ridicule and possibly abuse — so again, it’s hard to see it as cynical and opportunistic.
I’m not saying this distinction holds water factually or logically, I’m just offering it as an explanation of why people react this way.
Screechy, there’s probably definitely something in that, but the explanation I usually hear offered is that race is not real, it is a social construct, while gender is really for real totally real and can’t be denied. Which is, to me, odd. If race is not real, why can’t you identify as a different race? It’s just a game then (other than, of course, the crap that goes with being a minority). But if gender is a real existent thing, a really real totally real thing, then you can’t be the other gender. You can pretend, but you aren’t that. (I know, I know, it’s sex that is real, but they won’t play by the rules).
One more of those arguments that eats its own tail and gives me a headache. I once had a trans friend offer to send me an article on the topic that would convince me, he was sure. He never sent it. I suspect that, deep down, he knew how bogus the argument is, and that I would never buy something asserted without evidence.
People nail themselves to crosses and parade through Spanish cities in a true, painful sacrifice. It doesn’t make the amazing claims of Christianity true. :)
Why are we privileging “feelings” so much?