multifariaceFeb 27
Try to understand that that would be a subjective position I did not address. My only non-objective statement was the prod at their idiocy in my second part mocking their hate. There is no justification for hate of any kind.
Show threadfossilesqueFeb 27

The “white moderate” position you’re demonstrating is what MLK warned about: someone who agrees injustice is wrong, but insists on finding neutral framings for it. You’re more devoted to appearing objective than to justice.

Trans people do not owe anyone a medicalised justification for their existence on a government document, period. The DMV are not medical staff. Your gender has nothing to do with passing a test to drive.

Searching for a “reasonable” angle on a law built on hate doesn’t make you objective, it makes you an obstacle; and to paraphrase what MLK said: Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than outright hostility.

Show threaddandelion

even worse, the neutral framing is just wrong, there isn’t a medical reason to treat trans people as their assigned sex rather than their actual sex, and in fact there are medical reasons to view trans patients as their actual sex and not their assigned sex (as I get into in my comment above).

There might still be other neutral framings that can be used to undermine trans rights, I think the trans athletic bans are a good example (though, the more evidence we get on that, the more it is looking to be the case that trans women on average are like cis women in their physical fitness and ability, not like cis men).

Configure Lemmy redirect

Feb 27 at 3:43pmWeb
Show threadfossilesqueFeb 27
💯💯💯