im sorry but this article is required reading for everyone. ny mag presented freedom of sex—the moral case for letting trans kids change their bodies, by andrea long chu, a pulitzer prize-winning critic. so come on, people, open your minds. the mainstream media's fearmongering about trans kids is nothing but clickbait. don't believe the hype! it's necessary that we don't go for the latest wave of gender deniers who use any opportunity to miscast things like it's a well-thought out analysis :/
chu explained, "three main tendencies compose the anti-trans bloc in america today. the first, and most obvious, is the religious right, a principally christian movement that holds that trans people are an abomination and that 'gender ideology' is part of a broader leftist conspiracy to corrupt the youth. the second tendency is also obvious, if smaller: gender-critical feminists, better known as terfs. this group has its roots in the lesbian feminism of the '70s; today, the polemical acronym, which originally stood for 'trans-exclusionary radical feminist,' is used to describe any feminist who justifies her anti-trans views by citing women's rights. these views include the idea that gender must be smashed rather than affirmed; that women constitute a 'sex class' on the basis of their shared biology; and that the trans-rights framework exposes natal women to sexual violence at the hands of trans women, who are imagined as predatory males. but the most insidious source of the anti-trans movement in this country is, quite simply, liberals. butler, in their survey of the political landscape, misses the liberal faction altogether. i suspect this is because the anti-trans liberal sees himself as a concerned citizen, not an ideologue. he is neither radical nor a feminist; he is not so much trans-exclusionary as he is broadly skeptical of all social-justice movements. he is a trans-agnostic reactionary liberal—a tarl. the tarl's primary concern, to hear him tell it, lies in protecting free speech and civil society from the illiberal forces of the woke left," which is not true—obviously. ah, by the way, susan neiman's left is not woke is a wonderful little book ;)
remember, leftism and liberalism are two mightily different things, i.e., "leftist" and "liberal" are not interchangeable terms. boa noite, brazilian tarls. smoke a joint before bed xo
and read the full article in nymag <3
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/trans-rights-biological-sex-gender-judith-butler.html
#gender #politics #transrights
lea
npub1n4…e4mvu
2024-10-31 05:30:24
Author Public Key
npub1n4st260vuvdsdev4tjm6t80fesld26dvv93ndvvkcah3lqfax7hqse4mvuPublished at
2024-10-31 05:30:24Event JSON
{
"id": "e5548ba050a9770632435028fb87447cdd846911e07f86ad3f3fa61cdf4d633a",
"pubkey": "9d60b569ece31b06e5955cb7a59de9cc3ed569ac616336b196c76f1f813d37ae",
"created_at": 1730352624,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"t",
"gender"
],
[
"t",
"politics"
],
[
"t",
"transrights"
]
],
"content": "im sorry but this article is required reading for everyone. ny mag presented freedom of sex—the moral case for letting trans kids change their bodies, by andrea long chu, a pulitzer prize-winning critic. so come on, people, open your minds. the mainstream media's fearmongering about trans kids is nothing but clickbait. don't believe the hype! it's necessary that we don't go for the latest wave of gender deniers who use any opportunity to miscast things like it's a well-thought out analysis :/\n\nchu explained, \"three main tendencies compose the anti-trans bloc in america today. the first, and most obvious, is the religious right, a principally christian movement that holds that trans people are an abomination and that 'gender ideology' is part of a broader leftist conspiracy to corrupt the youth. the second tendency is also obvious, if smaller: gender-critical feminists, better known as terfs. this group has its roots in the lesbian feminism of the '70s; today, the polemical acronym, which originally stood for 'trans-exclusionary radical feminist,' is used to describe any feminist who justifies her anti-trans views by citing women's rights. these views include the idea that gender must be smashed rather than affirmed; that women constitute a 'sex class' on the basis of their shared biology; and that the trans-rights framework exposes natal women to sexual violence at the hands of trans women, who are imagined as predatory males. but the most insidious source of the anti-trans movement in this country is, quite simply, liberals. butler, in their survey of the political landscape, misses the liberal faction altogether. i suspect this is because the anti-trans liberal sees himself as a concerned citizen, not an ideologue. he is neither radical nor a feminist; he is not so much trans-exclusionary as he is broadly skeptical of all social-justice movements. he is a trans-agnostic reactionary liberal—a tarl. the tarl's primary concern, to hear him tell it, lies in protecting free speech and civil society from the illiberal forces of the woke left,\" which is not true—obviously. ah, by the way, susan neiman's left is not woke is a wonderful little book ;)\n\nremember, leftism and liberalism are two mightily different things, i.e., \"leftist\" and \"liberal\" are not interchangeable terms. boa noite, brazilian tarls. smoke a joint before bed xo\n\nand read the full article in nymag \u003c3\nhttps://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/trans-rights-biological-sex-gender-judith-butler.html\n#gender #politics #transrights",
"sig": "188b0119edd19e861867003febd680fe4d897aa7ceb962524bbead4c624cc997f16be407074742125575b6e75e7e3188aa6fd5347820a03ac957f9a87873c8f0"
}