I don’t know that it’s just patience wearing thin. There’s a lot of fearmongering on both sides. I think people already come to the table really amped up quick to throw stones. Hear, hear on the forums part, though.
Fair enough.
>but I have something against small group of people imposing on the whole society how we can use word women in context of pregnancy, especially in a world in which only biological woman can give birth to a child. This.…
Of course they are important. But do they hold more weight to rename how the 99.9% of the population is referred to? it’s the latter that frustrates people IMO. I think if people focused on simple acceptance of…
0.13% -> 1% doesn’t feel like rounding (it’s actually nearly a 10x change). 0.13 is not a large fraction. Assuming good intentions based on your other comments, but these things can elicit negative responses.
If women don’t agree with being a large part of their identity being renamed, then it doesn’t feel inclusive.
>There are lots of kids born with ambiguous & differing genitals where parents & doctors make an assignment for that kid outside the womb. I don’t think most people would argue against medically intersex people…
I think you’ve communicated your beliefs and experiences clearly and respectfully. You ask questions rather than name call and finger point. While I personally struggle with these new definitions and their potential…
I don’t know that it’s just patience wearing thin. There’s a lot of fearmongering on both sides. I think people already come to the table really amped up quick to throw stones. Hear, hear on the forums part, though.
Fair enough.
>but I have something against small group of people imposing on the whole society how we can use word women in context of pregnancy, especially in a world in which only biological woman can give birth to a child. This.…
Of course they are important. But do they hold more weight to rename how the 99.9% of the population is referred to? it’s the latter that frustrates people IMO. I think if people focused on simple acceptance of…
0.13% -> 1% doesn’t feel like rounding (it’s actually nearly a 10x change). 0.13 is not a large fraction. Assuming good intentions based on your other comments, but these things can elicit negative responses.
If women don’t agree with being a large part of their identity being renamed, then it doesn’t feel inclusive.
>There are lots of kids born with ambiguous & differing genitals where parents & doctors make an assignment for that kid outside the womb. I don’t think most people would argue against medically intersex people…
I think you’ve communicated your beliefs and experiences clearly and respectfully. You ask questions rather than name call and finger point. While I personally struggle with these new definitions and their potential…