"In this understanding, sex is not what you do, it is what you are." Glenn, I don't believe this is an accurate description, either of understandings about "sex" from before ten minutes ago or whatever is going on with kids in college. "Sex" does not refer to sexual activity. Sex IS what we are, it has always been what we are: every human being is either the male sex or the female sex. That is just basic biology. Every cell in my body is female, no matter what I fantasize myself as being. Every cell in my husband's boy is male (even if he sports a dress now and then). That has nothing to do with identity, any more than being human is our identity. (Yes, some humans have ambiguous sex characteristics, but that is a red herring I won't say more about except that according to scientists I trust, there are only two sexes in humans and all mammals.) And the blue haired queer kids would probably tell you that "sex" (either defined as I just did or as sexual activity) is not the issue at all. It's ALL about identity, which is determined and defined by each person and must be in the labyrinthine rules of the gender game "affirmed" by everyone else. That's why there's 600 genders or whatever there are. As the queer proselytizers like to say: "Sexual orientation is about who you want to go to bed WITH, whereas gender identity is about who you want to go to bed AS." Puzzle that out as you may. It only makes sense if you suspend disbelief and enter the phantasmagorical domain of gender identity ideology.
As a blue hair, there is a reading of this as anarcho communist culture appropriation from a specifically Maoist strategy. Adopt a highly vulnerable and conspicuous minority with numbers so large it becomes a majority and causes some political leverage. If reading Donald Trump as a fascist is a reading, then reading nonbinary youngsters as the youth in the Cultural Revolution is also a reading.
The question is what about this highly vulnerable and specific minority? Should the rules that apply to them apply to all of society? Playing that game is what is causing the trouble. Leave the trannies alone.
"In this understanding, sex is not what you do, it is what you are." Glenn, I don't believe this is an accurate description, either of understandings about "sex" from before ten minutes ago or whatever is going on with kids in college. "Sex" does not refer to sexual activity. Sex IS what we are, it has always been what we are: every human being is either the male sex or the female sex. That is just basic biology. Every cell in my body is female, no matter what I fantasize myself as being. Every cell in my husband's boy is male (even if he sports a dress now and then). That has nothing to do with identity, any more than being human is our identity. (Yes, some humans have ambiguous sex characteristics, but that is a red herring I won't say more about except that according to scientists I trust, there are only two sexes in humans and all mammals.) And the blue haired queer kids would probably tell you that "sex" (either defined as I just did or as sexual activity) is not the issue at all. It's ALL about identity, which is determined and defined by each person and must be in the labyrinthine rules of the gender game "affirmed" by everyone else. That's why there's 600 genders or whatever there are. As the queer proselytizers like to say: "Sexual orientation is about who you want to go to bed WITH, whereas gender identity is about who you want to go to bed AS." Puzzle that out as you may. It only makes sense if you suspend disbelief and enter the phantasmagorical domain of gender identity ideology.
"Sexual orientation is about who you want to go to bed WITH, whereas gender identity is about who you want to go to bed AS."
Which is why adding the other letters to LGB is a category error.
And why screwing around with language becomes the weapon of choice in these matters.
As with all aspects of identity politics.
As a blue hair, there is a reading of this as anarcho communist culture appropriation from a specifically Maoist strategy. Adopt a highly vulnerable and conspicuous minority with numbers so large it becomes a majority and causes some political leverage. If reading Donald Trump as a fascist is a reading, then reading nonbinary youngsters as the youth in the Cultural Revolution is also a reading.
The question is what about this highly vulnerable and specific minority? Should the rules that apply to them apply to all of society? Playing that game is what is causing the trouble. Leave the trannies alone.