- Joined
- Nov 16, 2021
Ok, assume I accept Zoverion's framing. Now some women have a distinct observable variance in behavior and physiology from others, let's call these two groups R-Women and F-Women. R-Women need exclusive spaces from Men and F-Women because of observable asymmetries of risk. F-Women seem to behave an awful lot like coom-brained men, so I guess we just need to structure society around seperating F-Women and Men from R-Women....."It is too late, I have already depicted you as the soyjack and myself as the chad."
View attachment 8032103
This stupid gotcha of "wOrDs oNlY MeAn WhAT We SaY ThEy MeAn" is always the last argument in the quiver, and it's always stupid. The argument this person just put forward says that if a person says they are a dragon, you should affirm that. But I'm sure this person would say that if the hypothetical dragon person wanted to try flying, you should stop them, because that's crazy. Identity isolated on its own is meaningless, a person could sit in their basement and identify as whatever they want and it would not matter. It only matters in social and institutional interactions, and those (should at least) have to do with material outcomes.