discussion Conservatives mock VP Harris for using pronouns at Disabilities Event

[ClashAndBurn]

 

 

For context, she’s at an event for disability rights and is describing herself for the benefit of people who are blind/visually-impaired.

[discosean]

The next time Ted Cruz wants *****, he should just look in the mirror. 

[americanlife]

The optics are laughable and embarrassing.

[Jotham]

This is the worst part about Twitter, because conservatives can constantly share that video without any context whatsoever and people will eat it up.

[ClashAndBurn]

Just now, Jotham said:

This is the worst part about Twitter, because conservatives can constantly share that video without any context whatsoever and people will eat it up.

Yeah, at first I honestly thought she looked a little silly but seeing the context made it make sense. For me at least. Conservatives also think using inclusive language for the benefit of the disabled is also degeneracy and should be mocked in general, so  

[Communion]

A woman is someone who identifies as a woman because humans are uniquely intelligent beings as the sole species we know of to be able to both be aware of self and process what is gender. "Is a cat something that identifies as a cat?" no because cats are not as intelligent beings. Humans are also the only animals to **** indoors but apparently that's not an issue for edgelords pandering essentialism. 

[GraceRandolph]

5 minutes ago, Communion said:

A woman is someone who identifies as a woman because humans are uniquely intelligent beings as the sole species we know of to be able to both be aware of self and process what is gender. "Is a cat something that identifies as a cat?" no because cats are not as intelligent beings. Humans are also the only animals to **** indoors but apparently that's not an issue for edgelords pandering essentialism. 

A woman is someone who was raised or assimilated into society’s understanding of the female gender. 

[hardbrit]

As the dem judge nominee said...What is a woman?

[GraceRandolph]

25 minutes ago, americanlife said:

The optics are laughable and embarrassing.

Using inclusive language for disabled people is laughable? Right-wingers just hate thinking about anyone but themselves. 

[GraceRandolph]

Just now, hardbrit said:

As the dem judge nominee said...What is a woman?

A woman is someone who was raised or assimilated into society’s understanding of the female gender. 

[bleuwaffle]

10 minutes ago, GraceRandolph said:

A woman is someone who was raised or assimilated into society’s understanding of the female gender. 

and how does society understand the female gender? what is a woman? ?

[GraceRandolph]

Just now, bleuwaffle said:

and how does society understand the female gender? what is a woman? ?

Society has understood gender differently depending on time and place. Gender is a tool of social categorization. 

[bleuwaffle]

1 minute ago, GraceRandolph said:

Society has understood gender differently depending on time and place. Gender is a tool of social categorization. 

what is 2022's version of a woman? what is a woman? ?

[GraceRandolph]

1 minute ago, bleuwaffle said:

what is 2022's version of a woman? what is a woman? ?

A woman is someone who was born a woman or later socialized into being a woman via transition. What is your definition of a woman?

[Communion]

24 minutes ago, GraceRandolph said:

A woman is someone who was raised or assimilated into society’s understanding of the female gender. 

Even this is imperfect because it still places the onus on society and not on the reality of human intelligence. If you talk about social order, it leaves room for people to still peddle naturalist fallacies. 

 

And you have to point out the ways in which noting this exposes these fallacies to see how absurd these essentialists are and *why* so many of them are Christian traditionalists. 

 

Most of the most revered aspects of being human are social constructions. The concept of love is quite literally as much of a human phenomenon as gender. You largely can't pinpoint some naturalist basis to either of them and are largely defined through self-identification and social role-modeling. Is love not real simply because you can only feel it in the same way one can only feel their gender?

 

When conservatives try to compare humans to cats or dogs or lobsters to try and debunk the reality of transgenderism, they're quite literally dehumanizing the target of their ire. They reject the unique brilliance of the human experience in favor of naturalist or theological essentialism. This is why so many of them think women aren't human beings worthy of choice and don't view LGB people as humans either. 

Edited July 27, 2022 by Communion

[GraceRandolph]

5 minutes ago, Communion said:

Even this is imperfect because it still places the onus on society and not on the reality of human intelligence. If you talk about social order, it leaves room for people to still peddle naturalist fallacies. 

 

And you have to point out the ways in which noting this exposes these fallacies to see how absurd these essentialists are and *why* so many of them are Christian traditionalists. 

 

Most of the most revered aspects of being human are social constructions. The concept of love is quite literally as much of a human phenomenon as gender. You largely can't pinpoint some naturalist basis to either of them and are largely defined through self-identification and social role-modeling. Is love not real simply because you can only feel it in the same way one can only feel their gender?

 

When conservatives try to compare humans to cats or dogs or lobsters to try and debunk the reality of transgenderism, they're quite literally dehumanizing the target of their ire. They reject the unique brilliance of the human experience in favor of naturalist or theological essentialism. This is why so many of them think women aren't human beings worthy of choice and don't view LGB people as humans either. 

Socialization is a huge aspect of gender though. You can identify as a woman or a man, but until you transition and actualize this you aren’t actually experiencing the world as a gender, and the world won’t see you as that gender. 

[rihannabiggestfan]

I don't find the color of the suit part necessary tbh. Might as well say your hair/etc color too then

[ClashAndBurn]

22 minutes ago, rihannabiggestfan said:

I don't find the color of the suit part necessary tbh. Might as well say your hair/etc color too then

That was how all the people at the table introduced themselves, apparently. Might be either customary or expected given the setting. I don’t know for certain.