Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| what-is-gender [2024/12/24 11:43] – pitt | what-is-gender [2025/03/11 10:34] (current) – [Logical Fallacies] pitt | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
| This really shouldn' | This really shouldn' | ||
| - | ---- | + | ===== Discussion ===== |
| From this experience we have within ourselves, socially, and with our bodies, we can then derive the three underpinnings of gender as a complex interplay of social, psychological, | From this experience we have within ourselves, socially, and with our bodies, we can then derive the three underpinnings of gender as a complex interplay of social, psychological, | ||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
| But here's the inconvenient truth: we don't need the approval of TERFs, “gender critical” anti-trans ideologues, and transmisic people to know ourselves. Trans people understand gender on a deep, visceral level through our own lived experiences. We define gender every day through our courageous choice to live authentically. Trans people are painfully aware of their gender and their sex - there is no denial involved; in fact, it is that very acceptance of both those facts is what brings trans people out and seeking the help, support, and care they need to thrive! No amount of semantic games from TERF keyboard warriors can take that away from us. | But here's the inconvenient truth: we don't need the approval of TERFs, “gender critical” anti-trans ideologues, and transmisic people to know ourselves. Trans people understand gender on a deep, visceral level through our own lived experiences. We define gender every day through our courageous choice to live authentically. Trans people are painfully aware of their gender and their sex - there is no denial involved; in fact, it is that very acceptance of both those facts is what brings trans people out and seeking the help, support, and care they need to thrive! No amount of semantic games from TERF keyboard warriors can take that away from us. | ||
| - | ---- | + | ===== Logical Fallacies ===== |
| Now to deconstruct some fallacies of TERFs who try to use these arguments, such as: | Now to deconstruct some fallacies of TERFs who try to use these arguments, such as: | ||
| Line 61: | Line 61: | ||
| **Moving the goalposts: | **Moving the goalposts: | ||
| - | ** | + | |
| - | Equivocation: | + | **Equivocation: |
| **Appeal to definition: | **Appeal to definition: | ||
| **Strawman: | **Strawman: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Conclusion ===== | ||
| So watch out for these in the first ask of “what is gender” or in their follow up points. Often if just means moving the goalposts. Typically it is expected to be a “gotcha” of some sort, so when you come with a well reasoned and concise definition, they will either move the goal posts, ignore it to some entirely different point, or attempt to pick it apart. Call them out on the first directly, address the new point only after you point out “well, since we have a definition that is acceptable…” to point out they concede their arguments re: gender, and for the last one, it almost always includes a need to split hairs, ask questions that provide false dilemmas, or are constructed in a way that presents a comparison that is not valid, such as “biological sex” vs “gender”. A common rebuttal is “this doesn’t make sense at all, because gender is based on your sex, not anything else” which is an example of a false equivocation, | So watch out for these in the first ask of “what is gender” or in their follow up points. Often if just means moving the goalposts. Typically it is expected to be a “gotcha” of some sort, so when you come with a well reasoned and concise definition, they will either move the goal posts, ignore it to some entirely different point, or attempt to pick it apart. Call them out on the first directly, address the new point only after you point out “well, since we have a definition that is acceptable…” to point out they concede their arguments re: gender, and for the last one, it almost always includes a need to split hairs, ask questions that provide false dilemmas, or are constructed in a way that presents a comparison that is not valid, such as “biological sex” vs “gender”. A common rebuttal is “this doesn’t make sense at all, because gender is based on your sex, not anything else” which is an example of a false equivocation, | ||