top | item 32651316

(no title)

CrazedGeek | 3 years ago

Both and neither? The language itself isn’t the core issue, it’s the overt repudiation of someone’s identity. The biology bit is just an excuse, made worse by it being wrong: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony...

discuss

order

naasking|3 years ago

> The language itself isn’t the core issue, it’s the overt repudiation of someone’s identity.

If gender is a social construct then it doesn't really exist except as a cultural artifact. If your identity is based on any kind of social construct, I don't see how it follows that anyone has to agree with or affirm that such claims ought to be a cultural norm.

Furthermore, disagreeing with such claims are cultural disagreements rather than moral disagreements. Cultural disagreements are not innately hateful. Therefore it doesn't seem to follow that affirming gender identity has any moral force, or that not affirming it is innately hateful.

That said, this obviously doesn't justify harassing trans people in any way, shape or form because of such disagreements.

ohCh6zos|3 years ago

Do you believe that there exists a moral obligation to affirm someone's identity?

ryandrake|3 years ago

Not OP, but I think we are not obligated to be respectful and nice, but why deliberately be an asshole? It's like someone preferring a nickname. If I know my friend Michael prefers to go by "Mike" and will get upset if I use "Michael", I'm not obligated to call him Mike, but I would be an asshole to deliberately call him Michael. Why be an asshole when you can do something very simple to not be an asshole?