You keep acting like appearance essentially means nothing, which isn't true.
Funny how capitalism is constantly curb-stomped on while the other systems have as many or more issues than capitalism. And people posting videos from channels like Second Thought aren't socialists?
I never, ever said it played no role at all, and i have now provided examples of myself saying it does play a role.
Plenty of people have denied the right of people to judge their own gender identity. Senator Clemens (R, obviously) is sponsoring a bill to fine public employees over a thousand dollars if they use pronouns that don't correspond to the sex on the birth certificate.
No, I'm not saying they have the power to control my /identity/, but they'll certainly attempt to force others to abide by their approach in public space, and/or vocally berate those who identify otherwise.
For the fifth (?) time: you can change every characteristic that is used to determine sex at birth, as well as every characteristic that you use to assume someone's pronouns.
Nope, cos if someone else chooses their own pronoun based on their birth sex, that's fine with me. You're the only one trying to ascribe others' pronouns to them and overriding their own.
For the 20th (?) time, what is your hangup with sex at birth? You have no sex characteristics at birth besides genitals and people don't use those to determine pronouns. Hence, Barbie would be called a 'she' and Ken would be called a 'he' and neither have genitals. Literally just stop using sex at birth, nobody gives a shit about that.
I saw a lot of nuance in the "It's okay to be angry about capitalism" thread, hardly curb-stomping. And capitalism gets its critics because that's the system we're living under; had e.g. autocratic monarchies been a power to recon with and had broad public support I suspect we'd see more criticism of it. Besides, criticism of a system is not advocacy for other systems; there are plenty of people critical of Biden that still would prefer him to Trump. And vice versa.
If you're calling to "degender" society, okay. Isn't that what the last 100+ years of emancipation, gender rights, and so on has mostly been about? Women can now wear trousers and be corporate executives and men can now wear skirts (although, of course, don't) and do childcare.
Genitalia are sex characteristics, and thus humans are sexed at birth according to their genitalia. That sex that they are assigned then determines the pronoun that will be used.
I didn't say there wasn't nuance. I just said the forum has some socialists/communists per the capitalism thread.
Yet when you see someone in the real world and use "he" or "she", you're not checking their genitals beforehand or asking for an ID card that lists sex at birth. Hence, sex at birth is a pointless metric in that sense of determining what pronoun to use. Say the Jennifer you know at work and use "she/her" might as well be Barbie because you never seen her genitals.
You are the one insisting A) sex at birth and biological sex are the same; and B) Biological sex determines pronouns. It is your position that involves the assignment of sex at birth. I'll happily stop talking about it if you stop making claims that involve it.
Yet you can change all the aspects you use to attribute pronouns.
There's nothing objective in a human linguistic construct like pronouns.
Which you expressed as those not liking capitalism being either socialists or communists. A dichotomy I objected to.
Sex at birth is a way of determining biological sex (at birth). Biological sex has lots of specific features.
If you don't actually like capitalism (not just complaining about an aspect here and there), then you're not really a capitalist, which means socialist/communist.
It's never that simple. It'd be just like counting the conservatives and naming Phoenix.
Why would I bother to prove you were wrong in the face of you conceding the argument anyway?
That was until we did i giant u-turn over the last couple decades and started aggressively re-gendering things in an inverted sense. We've moved away from "if you are a man, you must do this and not that", true, but now we are building a culture that instead says "if you do this and not that, you must be a man".
Did you just accidentally admit your pages long argument about identity being external doesn't hold up?
No, it's actually a perfect example of people's identities not being what they think it is internally. There are lots of people of obvious political inclinations that you can identify them, but who won't identify themselves that way. Do you accept that anyone who identifies themself as left wing is left wing? Or can you look at the things they say and judge when they're wrong?
Okay. So why do you think it's fine for Florida to pass laws insisting that a person's pronoun depends on their assigned birth sex if assigned birth sex does not determine someone's pronoun?
Who's doing that, in what context? There are a number of different movements with different ideologies, but because of these differences they would mostly need to be tackled individually.
