> They do however take issues with trans men existing and being acknowledged as such.
sigh
The arguments like “they are denying trans people exist!” and “this is causing violence!” are so over the top and tired.
No one is denying trans people exist. We simply think that instead of changing the way we use language to fit <1% of the population, maybe when a trans person goes to the Doctor they can simply say: “I was born a (wo)man”
The author does. She calls biology a "set of delusions so demonstrably false that even infants can see through them." Then calls trans-exclusionary feminism "biology based".
And she literally denies the Dylan Mulvaney being a trans-woman, calling her an "adult biological man". Which is so revealing because trans-woman obviously aren't the reason why some push for gender-inclusive language in pregnancy literature. They don't have uteresus. Only trans-men have them. It's about trans-men.
You don't need to participate, but that doesn't make "biological male" any less exclusionary.
Especially since it's a nonsense phrase. And even if it wasn't, I sincerely doubt the author actually knows about the chromosomal or endocrinological status of that person Biden spoke with.
sigh
The arguments like “they are denying trans people exist!” and “this is causing violence!” are so over the top and tired.
No one is denying trans people exist. We simply think that instead of changing the way we use language to fit <1% of the population, maybe when a trans person goes to the Doctor they can simply say: “I was born a (wo)man”