Anonymous #1 11w

Womanhood is neither a neighborhood nor a house

6

Comment Deleted

0

I’m not a dictionary

-3

Anonymous #5 11w

Clearly a lot of people

0

Anonymous bongo_fury 11w

But there’s a fundamental difference between a woman and an nb which is that one will say, “I am a woman,” and the other will not. How can those be in the same category? There’s a similarity in how each one gets to where it is, but if you take a look at them both you’ll see that they’re in different places. The logical conclusion of your position is to say that trans women are not categorizable, which is stupid, so you have to give them a binary gender. They don’t fit outside the gender binary.

0

Anonymous bongo_fury 11w

And they aren’t men, so they’re women. Ultimately it’s that simple

0

Anonymous OP 11w

“Shall I compare thee to a summers day?” “No I’m a lady” Like yeah fuck that guys analogy who needs it

4

Anonymous bongo_fury 11w

This makes 0 sense

0

Anonymous OP 11w

I’ll take any questions you’ve got. I can boil my argument down to, if they aren’t men or women then they’re non-binary, they aren’t non-binary, so they’re either men or women.

1

Anonymous bongo_fury 11w

You can’t call something a spectrum and then reduce it to 3 specific things. It’s not a spectrum then. Just call them Trans Women because that’s their category

1

Anonymous #4 11w

If you have a spectrum then you have a finite number of positions. In this case there’s either end and then there’s the middle, so that’s 3. I’m happy to call them trans women. It isn’t in contention whether or not we’re going to call them that. We’re asking whether “trans woman” is a type of woman or not, OP is saying it’s not, I’m saying it is

1

Anonymous bongo_fury 11w

That's a false premise. A spectrum does not imply a finite number of positions, it only determines the range. There's an infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1 (.1, .01, .001, .0001, etc). If you're reducing everything to either one thing, the other, or neither, that's not a spectrum. What you're describing is a binary, and then an exception to the binary

3

Anonymous #4 11w

Within that infinite range, one can arbitrarily define sub-ranges. 0-0.3, 0.4-0.6, 0.7-1.0. You can divide one into thirds while acknowledging the infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1, and within each third of one. Gender is a spectrum which can be divided into thirds. You could divide it differently if you wanted to, but I don’t want to. But if you want to think in terms of a binary and an exception to the binary then idrc.

1

Anonymous bongo_fury 11w

That’s also fine lol but then you don’t believe gender is a spectrum. It’s a ternary. Which is what the traditional belief has been for forever: Man, Woman, and Intersex. We’ve now come full circle lol

1

Anonymous #4 11w

If you want to go there then gender is actually three spectrums, not one

1

Anonymous bongo_fury 11w

You just made up your own rules and said “it must be true”

1

Anonymous OP 11w

It’s all made up anyways, I just think I have the more coherent way of thinking about it.

1