“I’m not separate from my community, I feel them in my bones—not because I’m an empath or any woo-woo shit but because I’m a normal person with basic levels of empathy—and my fear for their safety is keeping me awake at night.” Me too, Oliver, me too.
You’re right. It’s not an honest question from a position of curiosity. It’s not even a coherent position they are speaking from. On one hand, they insist that sex is both mutable and obvious. Meaning we can know it by observing it. And it’s something so big that you can read it off someone macroscopically.
Except when you have two women, neither of whom have ever had menses, and neither of whom never would have had a uterus due to how the DNA to protein to structure is in a way deterministic. These women were seen and evaluated to be baby girls when they were born, raised as girls, lived as women … and, unless they live in a time and place where they have access to recent medicine, no-one would know why they didn’t develop the typical internal genitalia, and without molecular testing, you can’t know which of them is, according to transphobes, a ”male” and which one is a ”female”.
Is maleness and femaleness — and let us be honest , they mean being a ’Real Man’, a ’Real Woman’ is something impactful, was always known about, is something in the essence of a person … why is it also, at the same time, something we need molecular analysis to know whether someone has?
If you can’t see the difference in social interaction and medical treatment in the clinic, what is the difference? It’s like claiming that genetic variants for being tall make you tall, even if childhood malnutrition means you are below average height. Your true height is in the molecular code that didn’t get coded for?
Really what they mean is you have a metaphysical mark of the devil on you, even if no-one but their cult can see the mark, and they know you are bad even if you don’t manifest badness yet.
“I’m not separate from my community, I feel them in my bones—not because I’m an empath or any woo-woo shit but because I’m a normal person with basic levels of empathy—and my fear for their safety is keeping me awake at night.” Me too, Oliver, me too.
Thank you for this post.
You’re right. It’s not an honest question from a position of curiosity. It’s not even a coherent position they are speaking from. On one hand, they insist that sex is both mutable and obvious. Meaning we can know it by observing it. And it’s something so big that you can read it off someone macroscopically.
Except when you have two women, neither of whom have ever had menses, and neither of whom never would have had a uterus due to how the DNA to protein to structure is in a way deterministic. These women were seen and evaluated to be baby girls when they were born, raised as girls, lived as women … and, unless they live in a time and place where they have access to recent medicine, no-one would know why they didn’t develop the typical internal genitalia, and without molecular testing, you can’t know which of them is, according to transphobes, a ”male” and which one is a ”female”.
Is maleness and femaleness — and let us be honest , they mean being a ’Real Man’, a ’Real Woman’ is something impactful, was always known about, is something in the essence of a person … why is it also, at the same time, something we need molecular analysis to know whether someone has?
If you can’t see the difference in social interaction and medical treatment in the clinic, what is the difference? It’s like claiming that genetic variants for being tall make you tall, even if childhood malnutrition means you are below average height. Your true height is in the molecular code that didn’t get coded for?
Really what they mean is you have a metaphysical mark of the devil on you, even if no-one but their cult can see the mark, and they know you are bad even if you don’t manifest badness yet.