Again, there's no reason arguments for gender should apply to race. You certainly haven't given one.
The Feminine Perspective against the Manosphere
- Thread starter ?!..!?
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a bunch of trolls trolling each other aesthetic jihad chicks dig guys with money cia lesbian david lesbian do you tongue punch the dirt star? dolezal1977 eating pussy without asking everyone on this board is a troll extraterrestrial bisexual feminist travis bickle justified ancients of noncing lesbian separatism luka's crop top malelesbian: english rp boy toy malethespian mansplaining feminism mr tea confirmed pegging freak mrs tea eaten out 24/7 prevent prevent! sarlacc pit taking the filth the art of trolling the feminonce massive the perils of self-publishing the viper of cunnilingus undisciplined lockerroom pussy eating unimaginable anguish version's throbbing penis
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Entire swathes of the world reject the argument as it pertains to sex/gender so I wouldn't get too hung up on what 'society' 'accepts' or not
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Either the argument is logical or not and it's the same argument; there's no supplementary 'reason'
Well basically no one accepts transracialism. Do you not believe culture exists?
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
By Butler's logic, they should do
False. It's not enough just to apply logic to empirical facts. You have to also give a reason for us to believe that it is appropriate to apply this logic to this specific set of empirical facts. So for example, the logic of the natural sciences doesn't always apply to the social sciences. Does that mean we should reject the social sciences? Or does it simply mean that the character of the facts that social sciences study does not warrant the application of natural scientific arguments?
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
@malelesbian you just have a suspicious disinclination to identify as transblack, despite the vigorous rapping
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
There's no preliminary reason given in the two-step argument you gave earlier
False, again. There is no reason to apply Butler's logic to race. One thing I'll tell you is this: there is certainly a difference between racial identity and racial culture. Being born black doesn't mean you automatically contribute to black culture. Just like being born female doesn't mean you automatically act like a woman.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Yes, you're saying they're equivalent there
But my argument there doesn't support transracialism. I never said actions define racial identity.
The preliminary reason is that we want to define gender and there's no anti-essentialist alternative to viewing gender as a social construct. But there is clearly an alternative to understanding race as a social construct. That being said, I do believe that race involves both biological and socially constructed elements. But that belief doesn't entail transracialism.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
But they could legitimately be said to, to the same extent as actions might define 'gender'
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Gender as either identical to sex or inextricably linked to it, obviously
No they can't. No one ever said that actions define race and you certainly never justified that definition of race. Acting black doesn't make you black. But acting like a woman makes you a woman. It's not hard to figure out.
That isn't defining gender, that's just reducing gender to sex and thus eliminating the concept of gender.
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
People have said that and your only recourse is to convention - not a philosophical argument!
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
In this definition, it's a facet of sex, sex expression but it can't be unlinked. That doesn't mean it's necessarily eliminated
False. First, why should we accept that actions define race? There's no reason. Second, what we are studying here is literally social conventions, so I'm not appealing to convention in lieu of an argument, I'm explaining the conventions that tell us how to define race.
But if it's a facet of sex, how do we differentiate it from sex? I never denied that there are connections between sex and gender, I said that sex doesn't determine gender. And if you claim sex determines gender, then you are again reducing gender to sex.