The Feminine Perspective against the Manosphere

[mixed_biscuits]

Again, your failure to understand the difference in logic between concepts of race and gender is your problem. This type of stuff confuses no one but you.

It's exactly the same move as the sex/gender move

And it's not just a thought experiment pointing out the formal equivalence as it's the logic that actual people are actually using to self-identify cross-racially.

 

[version]

 

[?!..!?]

It's exactly the same move as the sex/gender move

But why should we make this move? Why should gender and race share the same logic? The burden is on you to give a reason or argument. Most people accept that trangender people exist and transracial people don't. The fact that you don't understand this speaks worse of you than it does the gender ideology movement..

@version I just love the fact that he said "butt-ass" as if this is some special smell distinct from the smell of ass.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

But why should we make this move? Why should gender and race share the same logic? The burden is on you to give a reason or argument. Most people accept that trangender people exist and transracial people don't. The fact that you don't understand this speaks worse of you than it does the gender ideology movement..

But transracial people do exist by what you say are Butler's terms and they use the same argument.

 

[?!..!?]

But transracial people do exist by what you say are Butler's terms and they use the same argument.

No, Butler's terms only apply to gender. It doesn't matter if the argument is the same, what matters is that there is no reason to use this argument on the concept of race.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

No, Butler's terms only apply to gender. It doesn't matter if the argument is the same, what matters is that there is no reason to use this argument on the concept of race.

That's completely arbitrary of her and pretty unphilosophical

'Unprincipled exceptions' is the phrase

 

[?!..!?]

That's completely arbitrary of her and pretty unphilosophical

'Unprincipled exceptions' is the phrase

False. It is arbitrary of YOU to try to apply the logic of gender to concepts of race for literally no reason. Philosophers are allowed to be specific. Her claims about gender only pertain to gender.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

False. It is arbitrary of YOU to try to apply the logic of gender to concepts of race for literally no reason. Philosophers are allowed to be specific. Her claims about gender only pertain to gender.

She might claim they do but they don't...she can't just ringfence what is essentially a generally applicable logical move.

 

[?!..!?]

She might claim they do but they don't...she can't just ringfence what is essentially a generally applicable logical move.

But why though? Why apply the logic of gender to other areas? Why should we do this? Just because we can? Sound pretty ARBITRARY. Besides no one ever said that domain specific claims have to apply to all domains, that would make the claims general, not specific.

 

[william_kent]

here I demonstrate the failure of chat GPT as I ask "it" to rewrite "Rumplestiltskin" in the "style of Judith Butler" and "it" produces readable prose:

Once upon a time, in a realm of heteronormative hegemony, there lived a miller who, consumed by patriarchal ambition, sought to elevate his status by presenting his daughter as possessing the capacity to spin straw into gold. This proclamation, rooted in the performance of gender roles, set the stage for the emergence of power dynamics and identity negotiation.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

But why though? Why apply the logic of gender to other areas? Why should we do this? Just because we can? Sound pretty ARBITRARY. Besides no one ever said that domain specific claims have to apply to all domains, that would make the claims general, not specific.

It's not a logic of gender (not least as others are applying the same move to other things) it's a move that is applied to gender and can be applied to other things too for exactly the same reasons.

It's like teaching someone to climb a ladder to reach the attic but barring them from climbing a ladder to wash a window

 

[Murphy]

 

[?!..!?]

It's not a logic of gender (not least as others are applying the same move to other things) it's a move that is applied to gender and can be applied to other things too for exactly the same reasons.

But why should it be applied to things other than gender? You still haven't given a reason. Just because the logic that supports gender doesn't work in other contexts, that doesn't undermine arguments in support of gender.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

But why should it be applied to things other than gender? You still haven't given a reason. Just because the logic that supports gender doesn't work in other contexts, that doesn't undermine arguments in support of gender.

No, the logic does work in other contexts, inasmuch as it also works or 'works' for sex/gender

 

[mixed_biscuits]

The same sort of logic in fact precedes Butler in the case of nationality/citizenship

 

[?!..!?]

No, the logic does work in other contexts, inasmuch as it also works or 'works' for sex/gender

But why should that invalidate arguments about gender? Just because the same logic doesn't apply to race, why should that matter to gender? Here's the thing: people do accept others as members of a particular gender based on their behavior. But it's not clear that any large or important number of people accept others as members of a particular race based on their behavior.

 

[?!..!?]

The same sort of logic in fact precedes Butler in the case of nationality/citizenship

Could you elaborate as to why this is relevant and why this does any damage to Butler's argument?

 

[mixed_biscuits]

But why should that invalidate arguments about gender? Just because the same logic doesn't apply to race, why should that matter to gender? Here's the thing: people do accept others as members of a particular gender based on their behavior. But it's not clear that any large or important number of people accept others as members of a particular race based on their behavior.

The same logic does apply. This is philosophy, not anthropology

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Could you elaborate as to why this is relevant and why this does any damage to Butler's argument?

It damages Butler's argument to the extent that you or her find the analogous use unconvincing.

 

[?!..!?]

The same logic does apply. This is philosophy, not anthropology

No it doesn't apply. Society by and large accepts the concept of gender and rejects the concept of transracialism. You have to give a reason why we should even apply this logic to race in the first place.