Sorry, not my intent at all. I have pointed out the egregious erasure of intersex people in recent EOs and media coverage (not that there has been much) in dozens of conversations.
i believe they’re referring to the tendency of trans ppl to justify our right to exist by saying “but look at all the ways human sexual development can present! intersex ppl exist!” and like, yes, they do, and they deserve to be fought for just as hard. but not all intersex ppl are trans
plus, if we have to justify our right to be trans by arguing about chromosomal presentations and the complexities of human development with ppl who think that mrna vaccines literally rewrite your dna, well…
and we shouldnt have to use them as a shield to justify our existence. we have a right to exist because we’re people. our transness is an essential part of who we are, it makes us happy (generally), and it isnt fucking hurting anyone.
I guess I'm just lacking context here. Cis people mutilate intersex babies for the sake of their own biases and sense of norms. But trans people are hurting intersex people by using them to win a debate against trans medicalists? I must be missing something
right and that’s a separate issue that needs to be dealt with. but again, not all intersex ppl are trans. i dont want to speak for intersex ppl, but there are a lot of them that identify with their agab, and it seems unfair to rope them into a fight that isnt exactly theirs.
I don't know of this tendency, but I'll take your word for it. Regardless, I struggle to see why, in a time where trans and intersex people are under attack by our government, this is a relevant or valid grievance. Just seems like an excuse to shit on trans people but just my opinion.
i dont think it’s irrelevant. i think we, as trans ppl, do need to take a serious look at the rhetoric we use to fight for ourselves. we tend to get bogged down in the science and psychology of it all, as opposed to framing it as an issue of personal liberty and freedom of expression.
Neriah touched on many of these points. But ultimately we’ve moved way past the stage where arguments for transphobia are legitimately rooted in science - that is merely a front and the intersex argument for biological diversity goes nowhere with their arguments. Evidence: Richard Dawkins
By taking this route, we also argue that transness is biological. That doesn’t seem to be very well evidenced itself, and can be argued around by any intelligent bigot. It’s typically better to focus on self-expression, pursuit of happiness, and autonomy, core feminist principles.
There are a lot of scientific beliefs (similar to biological homosexuality), but no found genetic markers for transness. I am open to being wrong, but I’m not sure we want biological essentialism to define us, especially those of us that are feminists.
Comments