357
Squabbles, another recent reddit alternative, seems to be taking the doomed "free speech" path
(i.imgur.com)
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
357 points (96.1% liked)
13623 readers
1 users here now
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This seems to be the reason for the change (jayclees is the creator and admin of the site):
https://ibb.co/48hY8fm
It's always telling when people describe a minority as a "political movement" rather than... people
It’s also telling when people frame any and all discussion around anything LGBT+ as “transphobic” and “trying to kill trans people”.
The current gender/trans ideology isn’t just scientific fact that has to be followed and believed. People should be allowed to disagree and question it without being censored and banned.
That seems to be the point the creator is making - they didn’t make it to be a circle jerking safe space for only the far left “progressives”. They made it for everyone to be able to talk about their beliefs without being censored and banned, but one ideological group absolutely doesn’t want that.
It is scientific fact; at least every major medical organization in the US is in total agreement about what you refer to as “gender ideology,” and what we call the existence of trans people.
“Just asking questions” about it is as disingenuous and false as “just asking questions” about evolution. If you truly believe trans people exist and deserve to be respected you wouldn’t feel the need to ask these questions.
But yes, the founder chose anti-trans concerns above trans concerns. LGBT people will leave and the platform will become a conservative circlejerk. You have that part right at least.
You've really jumped deep into things by assuming what the person you're responding to means isn't scientific fact is the actual existence of trans people. They could, but they were woefully vague.
Most people I've interacted with who have misgivings are more focused on things like the insistence that there are no differences between afab and amab bodies, and therefore trans women athletes should be allowed to compete against afab athletes.
That's a currently "unallowed to challenge" topic that pretty much immediately gets you labelled transphobic, but here's the rub: female athletes doping with testosterone to achieve higher muscle mass is something that is banned from sports competitions, so why does it matter whether it was artificially obtained via pill or naturally by the fact that they had years of body and muscle development as male before transistioning?
There's no good solution to this problem, but the fact that anyone who brings it up gets labelled as transphobic is ridiculous. It's not inherently denying trans people anything to discuss it (that has more to do with the person discussing it than the topic itself). For me it's an attempt to ensure that all female athletes afab trans or other are on an even playing field, ideally so people have less excuse to easily dismiss trans athlete achievements.
I don't think this is vague in the slightest:
I know no person interested in trans liberation that also talks about "gender/trans ideology."
I find sports misgivings a red herring with regards to trans liberation. To me, it feels like asking someone to be less racist, and hearing them respond "well what about Black people in sports? What about white athletes' feelings? How do we determine if an athlete is white enough to compete against other whites?" The entire notion is wrong-headed to begin with. Yes, if we include trans people in sports, sometimes they might win. What's so bad about trans people winning at sports?
In any case, clearly the person I was responding to was not talking about this.
Here is the thing when it comes to sports, there are usually two main divisions in most sports, the best of the best league, and the women league. In most sports there is technically no rule against women playing in the best of the best leagues, but they are just at so much of a disadvantage it is almost unheard of for them to be able to compete at that level. The only reason that women only sports exist is to allow people with that biological disadvantage to compete professionally against others with the same disadvantage. It's a league that's sole purpose is to allow women to be competitive against other women because the men are just so much better.
It might sound like I'm bashing women's sports, but I'm not. I'm glad women have an avenue to compete at pro levels, because without women only sports they would not.
I have no problem with anybody trying to compete in the best of the best league, men, women, trans, black, white, etc. But when it comes to leagues specifically limited to give those in the league a fair competition, we shouldn't be opening that up to those who don't have the disadvantage that defines the league. This applies to women leagues, the special Olympics, and other limited leagues.
I know this, I just don’t think it matters. Our a priori assumption must be trans people should be included everywhere as much as possible, just like Black people or Jewish people. Fairness will adjust to our expectations, so everything will feel fine in the end, just as it did when we allowed other minorities to compete in leagues they were formerly barred from.
How can it not matter? You have a sport built around the idea of fair competition to a genetic physical weakness, and you think we should just throw that all away? I'm not sure why you are bringing race and nationality into this discussion, that's never been a race based disadvantage that we decided we needed to design sports around.
I agree, but I think sports falls under "not possible" because they don't meet the requirements for the women's league. I have no problem with a trans league, or they are more than welcome to compete in the best of the best league. I don't think they should be competing in women's sports, it's unfair to all biological women athletes who compete against other biological women athletes.
And if you want to compare it to race, where the idea of a race segregated sport would be super controversial, let's just get rid of women's sports all together. Women are equal to men, right? They can do anything a man can do, right? What are we pretending women aren't equal by putting them in their own sports leagues? Let's just get rid of all women's sports, let them compete directly with the men, and may the best win.
I’m fine sorting people by weight classes or hormone levels. But gender is not a useful way to do that and hasn’t been for years. The Olympics, for example, tests your hormone levels and not what your natal sex was or what your genitals look like.
But ultimately I just don’t think sports matters more than peoples’ rights. So if we have to abolish gendered sports, especially below the ultra-professional level, I’m fine with that.
And yes, people did indeed claim certain races had advantages in sports and pointed to science about muscle density to support their theories. They would consider themselves well-justified by Black people dominating certain sports. It is the same with trans athletes.
So you are for getting rid of women's sports, special Olympics, and everything in that realm and just letting everyone compete as people of the human race?
What rights? There is no right to compete in stuff you are not eligible for.
So you are fine with women essentially never being competitive in sports? Personally I think it's great they have their own league, because otherwise there wouldn't really be women in sports.
Except that they are competing in the open to everyone category, even if some races had an advantage, that's legal in an open to everyone category. Women's sports are not open to everyone, only to biological females who don't take performance enhancing substances. Again, if you want to essentially remove women from sports by pretending biological males and females are the same, that's your grave to dig.
Race isn't the same as gender, I'm hoping you realize that. In today's world, gender is more a state of mind than anything else, race is not. I can choose to become the opposite gender, I can't choose to be black as a white person.
If trans athletes want to compete in sports, compete in the open to everyone league, don't try to compete in leagues you don't qualify for. Women's sports, if they are to still exist, are for biological and non testosterone taking females only.
As I said, below the ultra-professional level, yes. Inside the ultra-professional level, gender tests are already not used to differentiate people into competition categories so they've already solved this problem. Read what I said in my previous post.
The point is it didn't used to be. This was because people had research at the time showing that Black people had "higher muscle density" and other nonsense pseudoscience that they used to bar them from the "open to everyone categories." Which, at the time, were not open to everyone, but only white people.
Since you are just not understanding this: the same arguments used to prevent Black people from competing (they would dominate certain sports, their inclusion would make white people feel bad, their existence is basically the same as taking performance enhancing substances) are literally the same ones used to prevent trans people from competing. We decided those problems didn't matter, and now, yes, Black people do win in certain sporting fields more. But everyone's decided that's okay.
Literally the same thing will happen with trans people. I know you have this weirdly deep-seated need to believe in the fairness of sports, but fairness is a construction we apply to sports, not something inherent in them naturally. If we include trans people as much as possible, it will still feel fair, even if trans people (gasp) even sometimes win.
Gender is not "more a state of mind than anything else," any more than sex (or race) is. Trans people are their actual genders, they aren't pretending to be a man or woman for the day, any more than a Black person is pretending to be a white person or vice versa.
Frankly, as I said at the beginning of this discussion, the entire sports argument is stupid though. The rights of an entire minority (yes, their rights) shouldn't hinge on whether or not they can compete in sporting events, and every time trans liberation is brought up people whine "but what about fairness in sports?"
You should find other stuff to care about, because the amount of trans athletes is vanishingly small and the amount of ink spilled on debating their inclusion with sports totally out-of-proportion to the "problem" itself.
Why should we have separate categories at the ultra professional level only? It wasn't until pretty recently that trans women trying to compete in women's sports was even a thing, and I believe they do have some tests in certain competitions that would not allow trans women to compete.
That was also during a time where they were segregated from everything, right? Also, while that reasoning might have been BS, the reasoning for not allowing trans women in women's sports isn't. Biology isn't BS, it's science. Trans women have a biological and scientifically proven physical advantage over women from birth.
The reason behind the argument matters a lot. You are comparing racism backed arguments with scientifically backed ones. They aren't the same argument, they are based on very different reasons.
What I meant is that gender is all in your head, sex and race are not. We should not define sports by what you say you are in your own head. When it comes to bathroom use, sure, base it on gender, aka what is in your head. When it comes to sports, we should use sex, not gender. I'm not trying to bash trans people here, I think they should be treated as the gender they identify with, and that is what I mean by gender being a state of mind, whereas sex is a biological state.
Unlike gender though, where at some point after birth you can change it, you can't change your race. One of these is physical, the other is mental.
Right now everyone has the same rights, so you don't lose it gain rights by switching genders. There is no right to compete in sports, so no right is lost by banning trans from women's sports. Maybe you have a different definition of "rights" than the actual definition?
Maybe trans liberation shouldn't be fighting for stuff like inclusion in sports? There is such a thing as taking a movement too far. I'm all for fair treatment, access to healthcare, inclusion in society, etc. But when it comes to thinking trans women are exactly the same in every way to a biological woman, that's just taking it too far and blatantly ignoring science. There are going to be times when we need to separate trans and biological women, and for the sake of fairness and the whole reason women sports what in the first place, trans women shouldn't play in women's sports.
Maybe trans people should find other stuff to care about besides inclusion in sports they aren't eligible for. I also don't see anything wrong with stopping a problem now before it becomes a bigger problem. Just look at climate change, how much better would it have been if instead of "it's not an issue yet, no need to care about it" we actually did care about it many years ago? Personally I don't like waiting for problems to become big problems before doing something.
I mean, people thought Black people had biological differences that would prevent them from competing on an equal footing too. There was literally science about it, in the same way you claim there’s science about trans people. And indeed Black people do dominate certain sports right now. If you want sports to be perfectly fair how can you reconcile that?
Because you’ve a priori agreed Black people competing is worth any amount of “unfairness” that results. The same will be true of trans people in the future.
The rest of your post is honestly just pearl clutching about sports stuff that neither I nor anyone else truly cares about. Sports will get over trans inclusion; trans people are already being included, even in the Olympics, so the process is happening. And no cis athletes have been dispossessed yet. So… continue being unhappy about it if you like, the world is moving on and so am I.
Black people dominate some sports IN THE BEST OF THE BEST DIVISIONS. Trans people are welcome to compete in that best of the best division.
Are you claiming there is no legitimate scientific provable advantage than trans women have over natural women in sports? Maybe there isn't anything legitimate for black people, or maybe it's a minor advantage present in some, but you can't deny trans women retain significant advantages given they are biologically male.
Trans can compete in the best of the best leagues like everyone else, yes. They shouldn't compete in leagues based around biological disadvantage because they don't have that biological disadvantage.
They are more than welcome to compete in the best of the best sports leagues, nobody is banning them from sports, just ones they don't qualify for.
I'm not unhappy about it really, I'm just fighting for equality is all, trying to keep things fair for everyone. I would be totally for a trans league, since they don't qualify as biological women but probably aren't good enough to compete at the best levels.
Just like how I don't think able bodied people should compete in the special Olympics, I don't think trans women should compete in biological women based sports, because it's just unfair to women.
Let me ask you this, if we are to store trans women in women's sports, should there be any limits? Can a male bodybuilder decide he is actually a women, then the next day go break records? Would you deny her entry, and if so why?
Yes, and I am provably correct.
Literally trans people (including trans women!) are competing in Olympics events now. Because as I've said over and over again, gender tests are not based on natal sex but hormone levels.
If trans women had an advantage, they would be crushing their cis competition. But they are not: for example, Laurel Hubbard. Check her out: https://olympics.com/en/news/weightlifting-laurel-hubbard-transgender-three-failed-lifts-tokyo
You've just been watching too much South Park. No one is trying to do compete in opposite-gendered leagues that is not trans, and as I've been saying from the start this is just a red herring with regards to trans liberation.
You don't understand what provable means at all. One example of someone who didn't crush the competition isn't proof at all. There was a recent trans woman who crushed women weightlifting records, that is an example of your idea being wrong. That person went from ok but not record breaking man to record breaking woman. Are you going to pretend the male genetic advantage had nothing to do with that?
And let me ask you this, what does a trans woman have to do to be a legitimate trans woman? Does she have to do anything more than say she is a woman? Does she need to take pills to be legitimate? Does she need to shave her beard to be legitimate?
If all she has to do is proclaim she is a woman, you can't seriously think that changes her genetic advantage, right? If a person can compete as a man one day and a woman the next, did they lose their male advantage? Or are you going to claim those aren't real women?
You can't ignore that males have a genetic advantage in sports, I think you were even agreeing with that point earlier. How does going from a man to a trans woman overcome biology? It doesn't. If males have no generic advantage, then why have any women's sports at all?
If your concern is valid, why did the trans woman weight lifter in the Olympics not easily crush her competition? Where is the source for any of your claims? I linked you my proof; your “common sense” is meaningless.
Trans women are not dominating sports when included and there seems to be no “male genetic advantage.” Indeed, as I’ve demonstrated over and over again, it is unfair not to include trans people in exactly the same way as it is to not include Black people.
Your continued sourceless concern trolling is baseless. I’m going to be leaving this conversation because you seem to have nothing more to add. If you have further concerns, I encourage you to reread what I’ve already stated numerous times.
If there is no male genetic advantage, why do males completely dominate the best of the best sports, and why do you say we should still have women's sports in the elite ranks? Clearly males have a genetic advantage in sports, it's undeniable.
Again, one trans women, who still did pretty well, doesn't prove anything. Look at Avi Silverberg, who came out as trans and dominated women's weightlifting records.
If you want proof of the male genetic advantage, just look at how they dominate all the sports that are open to males and females, which is basically all the professional sports. Even though it's open to both sexes, it's essentially 100% males. You can't deny the male advantage, it's clear as day.
Exactly.
The NFL isn’t a male league for example - it’s an open league. How many women have ever even made it to the tryout stage? One. A kicker. She didn’t come close to making even a training squad.
Sam Kerr, the best women’s soccer player on earth, wouldn’t even get close to making a men’s pro team. The world beating women’s USA team, winners of the past 2 world cups, got annihilated by an under 15s boys team.
Sex matters in sport, not gender.
You’re right, it’s not vague at all - it’s not denying trans people exist in any way. Trans people existing isn’t an ideology, so questioning the current trans and gender ideology has nothing to do with trans people existing or not. You’re jumping to conclusions because you want to dismiss any opinion you don’t agree with, and currently the “that’s transphobic!” line is basically a get out of jail free card in that way. Just call someone transphobic and get them banned so you don’t have to have your opinion challenged, create that echo chamber you want so badly.
Your response to the sports issue of “what’s so wrong with trans women winning women’s sporting events” says it all. “Who cares about biological women, the feelings of trans women matter more.”
Trans women can compete with men. If there is no physical or biological advantage for males then why do they need to compete with the women? They can compete with the men and should do just fine.
Lia Thomas is all that needs to be pointed out for why your ideology here is wrong. 500+ ranked man……instantly #1 ranked woman. Breaks all the women’s records. Where are the trans men swimmers dominating the men’s division in swimming? Or in track and field? Cycling? Anywhere at all?!
Bingo.
No one denies trans people exist, but this is how the “progressives” that want males competing with females in sport and using female-only services frame any and all questioning of their ideology and motives.
Why do you guys always always jump straight to “you’re trying to deny trans people exist”? No one is saying trans people don’t exist. people are, however, opposed to people telling preschoolers that if they like stereotypical opposite sex things that they’re trans and should choose a new name and wear the other genders stereotypical clothes. It’s indoctrination.
If a kid still believes in Santa clause, telling them they’re trans and giving them praise and letting them choose their own name etc is forcing your ideology on them. They don’t know any better. All they know is an adult is telling them something so it must be true. Again - they believe in Santa clause and the tooth fairy. They don’t have the mental capacity to understand these things. They don’t have the mental capacity to be making permanent life altering decisions.
This whole “just asking questions” bullshit is just a way the “progressives” try to weaponise anyone questioning their beliefs and ideologies.
If lgbtq people can’t stand seeing people have different opinions to them then they should leave. They shouldn’t be trying to get everyone else banned.
This is totally nonsense. No one is "indoctrinating" children... except those who claim that children can't be trans. I would encourage you to swallow your pride and your preconceived notions and actually talk to trans people, many of whom report knowing exactly who they were at the first age they were aware of gender.
Anyway, the rest of your point is basically hateful bullshit. If you can't deal with LGBT people and our opinions, you're the one that should get out. We frankly don't need you.
When people say this they mean that children don't have the mental capacity to make that life changing decision. Again - kids believe in santa clause, the easter bunny, and the tooth fairy. They are extremely easily influenced and will believe what their parents tell them to a fault. If you tell a kid they're trans because they like the colour pink as a boy or blue as a girl, they're gonna believe you. That is the indoctrination people are talking about.
Are there kids that actually have gender dysphoria? Sure. They're the extreme minority of the kids that are currently trans though, because they don't even understand gender let alone "gender identity". Even teenagers aren't mentally developed enough to be making life altering decisions, which is why we don't let under 18 year olds get tattoos, drink, vote, etc. If you accept that these restrictions need to be in place for children, how can you be ok with giving them life altering drugs and surgeries?
Sigh....there's the usual "transphobic" type dismissal/attack used to try and stop any and all discussion of differing viewpoints.
I can deal with LGBT people, I have no issues with them at all as I've said many times. I've explained why I don't, and what I do have problems with. Ironic that you say "We frankly don’t need you." because if that were true you wouldn't be constantly trying to force your beliefs on me.
That's the point OP was making when they said LGBT+ isn't political. LGBT+ isn't an ideology for people to share "beliefs" about. It will exist whether or not you believe in it, and normalizing people who say I don't believe in it is essentially denying the LGBT+ person's identity. It's ok to say you don't understand, or even like it, but to simply say "you're making up your gender identity" is wrong and harmful.
The current LGBTQ+ ideology is a political ideology though. It’s not just facts and it’s not about “existing” like people try to make it out to be.
The current trend of “a 3 year old boy that plays with barbies is trans so should be put on puberty blockers” is an ideology, same with “trans women have no physical advantages over biological women”, same with trying to teach 8 year olds about anal sex and masturbation. None of these things have anything to do with people “existing”.
The ideology that says simply saying you’re a woman makes you a woman and therefore are entitled to women-only places and things like scholarships and awards is what most people are against. No one cares if a 25 year old biological male wants to put on a dress and wear makeup and call themself Jane. Most people will even play along with your new pronouns. People shouldn’t be forced to by law though, and that’s another of the big issues people have.
Tl;dr - being trans isn’t political. Pushing the current trans beliefs and ideologies like gender identity, self ID, and “trans women are women” is.
How are medically approved operations by doctors an ideology? As long as the parents and their doctors have identified an issue they need to address, and the procedure they decide on is safe, reversible, and is known to make the child's life happier, who are you and I to stop them?
That's conservatives making it political. Claiming your own gender identity is not political, it's a natural human behavior to self identify. Please explain how you can say trans people can exist while at the same time if they try to self-identity then they're being political? There's no "conservative gene" that prevents you from choosing your gender identity (i.e. Caitlyn Jenner). Just acknowledging transgenderism exists is completely apolitical. If you see it as "pushing gender identity" that's your problem.
I didn't once mention medically approved operations? If you're talking about doing them on kids then that's a whole other issue.
And here lies the problem - parents pushing their ideology on to their kids. Also what "trans surgeries" are "safe and reversible"? None. Cutting off your male genitalia is not reversible. A hysterectomy is not reversible. Cutting off your breasts is not reversible (though you can at least try and make up for it with breast implants). Puberty blockers are not fully reversible, and most countries are now acknowledging this. You simply cannot stunt someones physical (and mental) growth and have it just resume years later as if nothing has changed. There are zero long term studies on puberty blockers. There are however known long term issues with them.
Not as a different gender/sex it's not. It has only become a thing very recently, where simply saying "I'm a woman" now means you're a woman, no questions asked.
That's not at all what I said. Pushing for being able to let "Self ID" give you access to the opposite sexes spaces and sports and awards and other things is the political part. Trans people existing has nothing to do with that. The issues with self ID are that men who have literally done nothing to transition can now go in to womens events/spaces without question. A great example is the weightlifting competitions where gender Self ID was allowed, so a anti-self id man entered and just annihilated the competition as a protest to show how stupid it is. The only requirement for him to enter the womens competition was for him to tick a box saying he's a woman.
Transgender and gender ideology are different things. Transgender is "I am the other gender to what I was born as". Gender ideology is "I can be whatever gender i want, whenever i want, and can change gender a thousand times during the day, and I should get all of the rights afforded to whichever sex/gender i call myself at the time". They're not one and the same.
No, I don't approve of irreversible medical surgeries on people under age of 16, but that's not a thing in any case. It's in response to your comments about 3 year olds getting puberty blockers (which is also not a thing) in which case it is temporary, reversible, and typically starts at 8 (10+ for boys).
My child is sick, feeling depressed, I go to the doctor, they discuss possible issues, and through preset, clinical guidelines, they decide that treatment for gender dysmorphia is an option. Again, reversible, safe treatments like puberty blockers and therapy that help prevent children from self-harm and further confusion about their identify. It's not like they're passing out puberty blockers like candies for funsies and doing this for fun.
I'm not even talking about transgender surgeries, which happens at 18+ of age.
Say's who? If one wants another to call them by another thing, who are we to dispute that? Gender CAN be fluid. Your biological sex that you were born with hasn't changed, it's their GENDER. Gender doesn't have to match your sex. And transgenderism has been a thing since ancient times. Have you considered that maybe more people are coming "out" recently because they're feeling safer to express themselves?
There have been exactly 0 assaults by transgender women entering a public bathroom. And your concerns about a troll entering sports competitions is going to out-weight all of the self-harm and suicides committed by people suffering from unaddressed/repressed gender identity issues?
Show me one time where that has happened and it has harmed someone else by doing it. And again, if they want to change their gender once or a thousand times, how is it any of your business? Besides sports competitions and bathrooms, I mean.
Having empowerment over their gender identity is an important part of being a transgender person, denying them that right is inhuman and cruel. Gender ideology, or whatever you want to call it, is simply (in my opinion) expressing a sense of safety and freedom to others that want to identify as something else from what they were born as. And believe it or not, this can happen whether you are conservative or liberal - it is absolutely a HUMAN desire, not a political one.
Look, I understand that if I call someone that looks and talk like a women a she, but wants to be called a man, there's going to be confusion. But what do I lose out of my day if they simply said "sorry, I'm actually a he" and I respect that moving forward?
FYI one of these things that never happen happened again:
https://reduxx.info/exclusive-trans-woman-confronted-by-mother-in-swimming-pool-locker-room-is-a-convicted-pedophile/
That thing that never happens yet still happens isn't actually happening? lol Also why did you choose 16 as your cutoff? They're still legally, physically, and mentally a child at 16.
Not fully reversible, and the sooner your "side" acknowledges this the better. Governments all over the world are recognising this now and are removing all mentions of "fully reversible" from their documents and legislation, and many are now outlawing it altogether because there are literally no long term studies done to prove that they are reversible. The difference between 3 and 8 or 10 is completely irrelevant. A 8 year old has no better understanding of gender identity than a 3 year old, they lack the mental capacity for understanding this and they absolutely cannot understand the life long repercussions.
Sick? Gender dysphoria/dysmorphia doesn't make anyone "sick". You're also overlooking all of the places that hand out diagnoses and scripts for drugs after a literal 10 minute phone call, intentionally so most likely.
Apart from when they don't, like how you yourself even said in this same post that you're ok with it at 16 years of age. What is it, 18 or 16?
Again, this is the problem - you can call yourself whatever you want. I. Don't. Care. Simply calling yourself a woman however should not mean that you now have access to women's sports and women only safe spaces like gyms and doctors etc.
Come on mate, you don't even believe these lies.
The fact that even post gender affirming surgery the suicide rate doesn't decrease among transgender people says all that needs to be said. You're basically saying "let womens sports be taken over by biological males because if you don't the transgender people will kill themselves". I believe this is what you guys call "gaslighting"?
I literally just did with the weightlifting example. A woman lost out on a prize because a man chose to be a woman so he could enter the competition. Self ID lets that happen. He did it to stop another self ID'ing transgender person from winning, to show how stupid the rule is. If you want other examples just look at the women that get raped in bloody rape crisis centres and even prisons by self id'ing males.
Sports competitions and bathrooms etc in this situation are the only thing I am against. I don't care if you want to change your gender 1000000 times a day. It doesn't affect me. I don't care. As I've said many times, I care when it affects other people, such as in sporting competitions and bathrooms (and children of course).
You're not going to get any disagreement from me though, this is what I keep saying. I have nothing against transgender people. Everyone can live their life identifying as whatever the hell they want, I don't care. I care about fairness, safety, and scientific facts though, so when you identifying as something else encroaches on any of that, that's when we have a problem.
Indigenous peoples have acknowledged a “third gender” aka non binary for centuries - way before colonization.
How can you say self identifying in regards to sex/gender is a recent ideology when it’s been part of human history for centuries?
Sounds like bland, generic, thoughtless conservative nonsense to eliminate other perspectives (especially when you discount them as new despite existing for centuries)
It hasn't though. People are now using absurd leaps to try and pretend that it has been around for centuries, but it hasn't. Got some links to these "third gender" stories?
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/what-two-spirit-means-native_l_62aa0b3ce4b06169ca93c14e
https://www.ihs.gov/lgbt/health/twospirit/
https://www.ncai.org/policy-research-center/initiatives/Pruden-Edmo_TwoSpiritPeople.pdf
https://www.theindigenousfoundation.org/articles/the-history-of-two-spirit-folks
https://www.firstpeople.us/articles/the-two-spirit-people-of-indigenous-north-americans.html
https://asandersgarcia.humspace.ucla.edu/courses/earlyamhistory/2020/06/12/understanding-gender-roles-in-native-american-communities-using-computational-analysis/
lol "two spirit = third gender"
Those links say that the indigenous people used "two spirit" to refer to homosexuals. That's not at all like "self identifying".