If this is the the guy that’s arguing for trans rights, I’m afraid the cause might be lost. From his weird warping of definitions (the amount of times he defined something, you repeated it back and then he would deny it) or his crazy analogies (the electron point destroyed brain cells), it’s clear his argument hinges on a post modern, deconstruction despite his assertion otherwise.
Although I didn't hear him use the words - he considers “woman” to be a social construct. He changes the definition of woman from ‘a synonym for an adult human female’ (the definition for centuries until five minutes ago) to ‘someone who intentionally exhibits characteristics which, in our current culture, are commonly associated with feminine appearance and behavior, in order to simulate an adult human female ‘. In other words, to him a simulated female is as much a woman as an actual, biological adult human female.
He probably calls margarine butter. (It is made to intentionally look and act like butter, so it must be butter.)
But it gets even stranger; if the concept of women is a “made up construct”, why is there an incessant desire to perform the “unreal” construct? Does it just reaffirm what we know to be what a woman is?
If this is the the guy that’s arguing for trans rights, I’m afraid the cause might be lost. From his weird warping of definitions (the amount of times he defined something, you repeated it back and then he would deny it) or his crazy analogies (the electron point destroyed brain cells), it’s clear his argument hinges on a post modern, deconstruction despite his assertion otherwise.
Your patience is Biblical.
Although I didn't hear him use the words - he considers “woman” to be a social construct. He changes the definition of woman from ‘a synonym for an adult human female’ (the definition for centuries until five minutes ago) to ‘someone who intentionally exhibits characteristics which, in our current culture, are commonly associated with feminine appearance and behavior, in order to simulate an adult human female ‘. In other words, to him a simulated female is as much a woman as an actual, biological adult human female.
He probably calls margarine butter. (It is made to intentionally look and act like butter, so it must be butter.)
But it gets even stranger; if the concept of women is a “made up construct”, why is there an incessant desire to perform the “unreal” construct? Does it just reaffirm what we know to be what a woman is?