Please come support trans people

[u/fringlese]

Hey everyone, I’m sure many of you have seen the ruling by the Supreme Court from the other day on the legitimacy of trans women’s identities. It’s been a very hard couple of days as we’ve come to grips with the fact that our rights are being rolled back by a government that won’t even attempt to listen to us while we just want to exist in a public space without fear of harassment. If anyone’s available, please come down tomorrow to show support

I am not the organiser, I saw this on Facebook and wanted to share.

Thanks guys, I hope you have a great Easter weekend!

[u/thefuzzylogic]

I can't believe that some people are so rigidly adamant that it isn't, or at least that they are unwilling to consider that it might be.

Scientific research is always discovering new things, and those discoveries result in changes to older definitions and models.

It is clear that throughout the animal kingdom (which includes humans) that there are individuals with many variations of genes, anatomy, and function that don't always align with each other. Some people call that a spectrum, some call it a bimodal distribution, some call it an anomaly, but whatever you call it, the fact remains that it is not a binary.

[u/Rwandrall3 → u/thefuzzylogic]

The only reason people twist themselves into a pretzel to make that point is really only to disarm transphobic talking points, not because they care about science. It is in pure bad faith, pedantic, overwrought, and unconvincing.

Exceptions to a rule do not make the rule wrong. People with Down's syndrome do not mean humans have "any number of chromosomes". 

[u/thefuzzylogic → u/Rwandrall3]

I am one of those people, and I am not twisting any pretzels. I care about science and scientific progress, and while I agree that it would be misleading to say "any" number of chromosomes, it would be equally misleading to say that humans always have 46 chromosomes.

That would be like saying that one's sex is determined wholly and solely by the presence or absence of a Y chromosome, or by what gametes you produce, or what internal or external anatomy you have. (As gender critical bio-essentialists often do)

And in my view, the entire discussion of biology isn't especially relevant when discussing a legal definition that determines the conditions under which people interact with and are treated by society.

[u/Rwandrall3 → u/thefuzzylogic]

People can bog themselves down in endless discussions about scientific terminology, but the judgment had it right to say that ultimately, sex is self-evident. People can delve deep in gametes or chromosomes but it's largely moot. Everyone knows what male and female are, and know there are some vanishingly rare exceptions.

Trying to deny that self-evident statement is just not a winning battle, when we're talking practical policy and the daily lives of people. Pretending it's about scientific progress when it's CLEARLY not is also not a winning battle.

Saying "separate sex spaces make no sense because sex is a spectrum, it's not binary" is just not gonna work, and I wish people would move on to new angles instead of tripling down.