Dear New York Times

16 Oct

Regarding this article:

“And in an age of gender fluidity, the word (sex) is hard to define.” It’s defined as “not gender.”

“The new interpretation has some science to back it up.” No. It doesn’t.

“Call it prudishness, if you like, but such modesty is common.” I call it “living in a rape culture.”

“But we have to ask whether physical modesty is tantamount to racism.” Like hell we do.

“A transgender girl may go to the girls’ sex-ed class.” Which this boy needs to do exactly why?

“The guidelines largely extend to sports teams as well.” Even when boys are bigger than girls. Thanks a lot.

“The agencies may have walked themselves into a legal contradiction.” Doesn’t that suggest to you that maybe there is a problem with all of this?

“The girls have sincere moral or religious beliefs that they must practice modesty.” This is irrelevant.

“A student who did nothing more than act like a typical girl.” A typical stalker, you mean.

“Religious pluralism requires accommodation of the demure.” Stop trying to make this be about religion.

“Transgender individuals have more reason to worry about violence.” Prostituted TW of color do, otherwise it’s women and girls who win this unfortunate lottery.

“Switching from one sex to the other” Body mods do not change your sex.

You’re welcome.

Advertisements

4 Responses to “Dear New York Times”

  1. roughseasinthemed 2016/10/16 at 1:23 am #

    Nice. Regarding the first one, ‘sex’ is hard to define, reminds me of a recent email exchange I’ve had where I said feminism is not difficult to understand or explain. Why are people aka men/MRAs making it difficult? We all know the answer of course. It’s exactly the same as the above. We do not want women to have rights, opinions or anything even remotely resembling equality.

    Although the Tranz (wo/menz) we loves them.

    Liked by 4 people

    • urthboundmisfit 2016/10/16 at 1:57 pm #

      Sex is not difficult to define. It is merely the biological features that determine whether you are going to produce a new organism or merely fertilize an egg. If you make eggs (the offspring’s first cell, by the way), you’re female; if you make fertilizer cells or sperm, you’re male. If you make both, you’re a true hermaphrodite, which no human being is.

      Scientific literacy would go a long way to easing a lot of this conflict. Too bad most of the people arguing about it seem to be English majors. And that’s not as much of a dig at English majors as you might think; they serve many useful purposes in society. I know one who went on to be a librarian and we do need librarians. But tell you what… if I want to know how to critique a novel, I’ll ask an English major. If I want to know about reproduction I’ll go ask a biologist.

      And yes there very much is a sex binary because you need two cells to produce one offspring in any sexually-reproducing species. There are rare exceptions where a sexually-reproducing species can perform parthenogenesis. It’s still the female doing it though. She’s the egg-producer.

      I don’t know what to say about truly* intersexed people. I think the concept of gender identity is nothing more than internalized stereotype so I’m not sure why we would apply it to them. If only our culture would make it safe to exist in the in-betweens**, this wouldn’t even be an issue.

      [*Most people labeled “intersexed” are still actually male or female, they’ve at least got the anatomy to produce eggs or sperm even if they can’t put it to reproductive use. The folks who truly fall in between are the rarest of the rare, and calling them a “sex” is almost like saying blindness is an eye color.

      **There’s a difference between saying the sex binary is real and saying that anyone existing outside the sex binary doesn’t actually exist and therefore deserves no basic courtesy or human rights. The simple fact is that some people must exist outside that binary through an accident of genetics. So maybe if we spent less time having to push womanface-wearing males out of bathrooms/locker rooms/dressing rooms that they do not belong in, and having to dodge their hateful attacks on Twitter, we’d have more time to discuss this like rational adults. I’m sure the intersexed would appreciate it, if we did it right.]

      Liked by 1 person

  2. diana (@mamadiana) 2016/10/17 at 12:24 pm #

    fix the mens rooms so trans would feel safer there. why should it be the problem of women to accept these trans into our spaces. they arent women. modifying appearances does not make a man into a woman anymore that getting ear piercings does….. transwomen do not belong in female spaces not bathrooms not change rooms not homeless shelters reserved for women not on sports, not using our limited healthcare resources ( women do not need prostate exams) and not in women’s jails or prisions. It is shameful that these people have tried so hard to co-opt space not theirs. Let them do the hard work of creating their own spaces. and not the least all transwomen, you are not now nor will you ever be lesbian so keep your penis born body out of our space

    Like

    • Miep 2016/10/17 at 12:32 pm #

      That’s a very important point. Far too frequently this is framed as women’s responsibility, to protect men who are not performing masculinity in some manner, from men who enforce it, as if these latter are some irrevocable random force of nature.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: